iors 


Sy 
bors 


< See 
nae Corea re : 
erewerececens 
aa 
eats = = ~ * a = ==! 
ear eeee Sie Seeeiripe pees eee ae See see eS : se ee 
asi ators é ei Z : 2 a 2 sez ete et = 


ware ncrne 


Petree : oi 


ah Snes seen 


esr ean 
Pope chsh 


Fe er eath 


SS 
want tga S reser g 7 rons 
Spee aan : 2 Z Seana eee See tey ae 


jae 


ey 


eat OF PRINCETO 


A 4 
ie ¢ 
“ECL ogicaL sew 


Araneta eencmate mente 


Br LOLGe BS 7-L904 

Burrage, Champlin, 1874- 
Lo5i 2 

The church covenant idea 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2022 with funding from 
Princeton Theological Seminary Library 


https://archive.org/details/churchcovenantidOOburr 


Wat 


The Church 
Covenant fldea 


Its Origin and 
jlts Development 


By Champlin Burrage 


PHILADELPHIA 
American Baptist Publication Soctety 
1904. 


Copyright 1904 by the 
AMERICAN Baptist PUBLICATION SOCIETY 


Published October, 1904 


From the Society’s own Press 


To 


MY FATHER 


Henry S. Burrage 
WHOUCSUGGESTEDS TRIS SIUDYS0n. LH 
ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF 
THE CHURCH COVENANT 


IDEA 


PREPACEH 


THE material presented in this volume is the result 
of investigations carried on by the author at intervals 
during the last five or six years. In its preparation 
various libraries have been visited and consulted, among 
which may be mentioned especially the Library of Har- 
vard University, the Congregational House Library, and 
various other libraries in and about Boston, Mass. ; the 
Library of Yale University (Dexter Collection), New 
Haven, Conn.; the Lenox Library, New York; the 
Library of Congress, Washington ; the Royal Library, 
Berlin ; the Bodleian Library, Oxford ; Lambeth Palace 
Library, Doctor Williams’ Library, the Congregational 
Library, the Angus Library (with the Gould Collection) 
at Regent’s Park College, and the Library of the British 
Museum, London. 

In the preparation of this volume the author has 
found two books especially helpful, namely, Dr. Henry 
Martyn Dexter’s ‘The Congregationalism of the Last 
Three Hundred Years, as Seen in its Literature,’ and 
Prof. Williston Walker’s ‘The Creeds and Platforms of 
Congregationalism.”’ 

In a work of this kind, that deals with a subject con- 
cerning which so little has been written, the author 
has thought it advisable to quote at length the various 
writers to whom reference is made, in order that the 


vi 


reader may weigh the evidence for himself and draw 
his own conclusions. The author is well aware that on 
certain points the information that has been gathered is 
but meagre at best, nevertheless he hopes that the vol- 
ume as a whole is as exhaustive as at this time might 
reasonably be expected ; but he will be glad to receive 
any additional data on the subject that may have escaped 
his notice, and especially the text of any early church 
covenants of unusual interest. 

In the production of this volume the author also owes 
much to helpful suggestions given him both in America 
and abroad. Especially would he acknowledge his in- 
debtedness to Prof. Williston Walker, of Yale University, 
and to Principal George P. Gould, of Regent’s Park Col- 


lege, London. 
C. B. 


Lonpvon, September 1, 1904 


Vil 


CONTENTS 


INTRODUCTION. . 


CHAPTER I 


THE CHURCH COVENANT IDEA AMONG THE ANABAPTISTS ON 
THE CONTINENT . 


CHAPTER II 


THE CHURCH COVENANT IDEA AMONG THE SCOTCH RE- 
FORMERS . 


CHAPTER III 


ROBERT BROWNE AND HIs VIEWS CONCERNING THE CHURCH 
COVENANT 


CHAPTER IV 


SOME OF THE EARLIEST BROWNIST, OR INDEPENDENT, COVE- 
NANTS . 


CHAPTER V 


Tur GENERAL ACCEPTANCE OF BROWNE'S CHURCH COVE- 
NANT IDEA BY THE EARLY INDEPENDENT LEADERS . 


CHAPTER VI 


Tie CHURCH COVENANT IDEA IN DISFAVOR , 


PAGE 


1x 


13 


26 


34 


45 


58 


62 


Vill 


CHAPTER Vil 


OTHER EARLY CHURCH COVENANTS IN ENGLAND AND 
AMERICA BEFORE 1640... . 


CHAPTER VIII 


THE LITERARY DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE CHURCH COVE- 
NANT IDEA . 


CHAPTER ix 


BAPTIST VIEWS ON THE CHURCH COVENANT IN ENGLAND 
UNTID 7000-5. ate fie Ae 


CHAPTER UX 


THE CHURCH COVENANT AMONG ENGLISH CONGREGATION- 
ALISTS AND BAPTISTS SINCE 1640. 


CHAPTER XI 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHURCH COVENANT IDEA IN 
AMERICAN CONGREGATIONAL AND BAPTIST CHURCHES 
DENCE: [6402.2 yi diek utes yee ne ee eet ae 


CHAPTER XII 
THE MANNER OF USING THE CHURCH COVENANT THROUGH- 


OUT ITS HISTORY TO THE PRESENT TIME. 


APPENDIXES <5 4.036 co 2 pee eee. eet ee 


PAGE 


je 


113 


122 


167 


221 


INTRODUCTION 


In general, Northern Baptist churches in this country 
use a church covenant. It has its place with the Arti- 
cles of Faith, and our church manuals which include 
the one, include also the other. What is its origin, and 
what has been its history? These questions are not 
easy to answer in full, and it can only be hoped that the 
following pages may help, in part at least, to solve the 
problems raised. 

For aclue to the origin of the church covenant idea 
we naturally turn first to the New Testament, for Baptist 
churches are supposed to be founded on the customs of 
the apostolic churches. But we look in vain for any- 
thing more than a mere suggestion of such a covenant 
there. The word covenant, however, is a scriptural one, 
and may be found frequently throughout the Bible, 
being first used in Gen. 6:18. H. Clay Trumbull, p. p., 
in his two scholarly and widely accepted volumes, “The 
Blood Covenant’”’ and “The Threshold Covenant,’ has 
shown satisfactorily that the covenant idea was wide.- 
spread among all peoples of the earth, even long before 
the time of Abraham, and goes back certainly to the 
day when Abel offered. his sacrifice to God, possibly to 
even an earlier period. | 

Yet though the church covenant idea, as it is known 
to.us, does not seem definitely to appear in the New 
Testament, and though the term covenant employed in 


x 


relation to a Christian church is evidently of compara- 
tively late date, it is interesting to note that in Asia 
Minor, very early in the Christian era, namely, during 
the reign of the Emperor Trajan (A. D. 98-117), there 
were Christians who seem to have made use of an idea 
practically equivalent to, though earlier and therefore 
naturally more informal than, the church covenant idea 
of later times.’ This fact is clearly manifested in the 
well-known letter of Pliny the Younger to the Emperor 
Trajan (written about the year A. D. 112), in which he 
says ‘that they [the Christians of that time in Pliny’s 
domain] bound themselves by an oath at their meetings 
not to be guilty of theft, or robbery, or adultery, or the 
violation of their word or pledge.” ? 

This oath resembles the earliest church covenants of 
later times, though, of course, the term covenant was 
not used. 

It seems highly probable that other examples of early 
church oaths are to be found in the remaining literature 
of the period contained either in the reported confes- 
sions of Christians or in the early Christian writings. As 
to the origin of these church oaths, there is, it would seem, 
a reasonable explanation. It is a well-known fact that 
of the two classes of Jewish proselytes the ‘“ Proselytes 
of the Gate” “bound themselves to avoid . . . blas- 
phemy, idolatry, murder, uncleanness, theft, disobedience 
toward the authorities, and the eating of flesh with its 


1 This important point was suggested to the author by Henry M. King, p. D., pastor 
of the First Baptist Church, Providence, R. I. 


2 The part of Pliny’s letter referring to the point in hand reads in the Latin, “Segue 
sacramento non in scelus aliquod obstringere, sed ne furta, ne latrocinia, ne adul- 
teria committerent, ne fidem fallerent, ne depositum appellati abnegarent”’ (C. 
Plinit Caecelit Secundi Epistolarum Libri Decem et Panegyricus. Paristis, 1823. 
Epistola XCVII, pp. 199, 200). 


xi 


blood.” It was evidently a regular requirement im- 
posed by the Jews that these Gentile Proselytes of the 
Gate should make such an oath. Likewise when the 
Jews became Christians and formed a Jewish Christian 
church, as in Jerusalem, they seem to have retained this 
custom, and to have required of the Gentile Christians 
in Antioch, as recorded in Acts 15 : 19, 20, and repeated 
in slightly different phraseology in ver. 29 of the same 
chapter, ‘that they abstain from the pollutions of idols, 
and from fornication, and from what is strangled, and 
from blood.”” When Gentile or chiefly Gentile churches 
later began to be formed it is not surprising to find, 
therefore, especially in Asia Minor where Jewish influ- 
ence was very strongly felt, that the church oath is re- 
corded as being a custom within the church of Jesus 
Christ itself. How widely the use of the church oath 
spread among the early churches is probably as yet 
hidden in the records of antiquity still remaining. We 
know already, however, the origin of the church oath, 
and the time and conditions of its origin, as given in the 
fifteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. 


1 Prof. Albert Henry Newman, “A Manual of Church History.’”’ Philadelphia, 
1900, Vol. I., p. 58. 


is 


i 


x an ~N y 
poge | ee Mie ad 


eT es 


13 


CHAPTER I 


THE CHURCH COVENANT IDEA AMONG THE ANABAPTISTS 
ON THE CONTINENT 


N the growth of the Christian church the Old Testa- 
ment covenant idea came into new prominence and 
received a new application during the period of the 
Reformation, when Christians who had come out of the 
Roman Catholic Church not only strongly felt the need 
of one another’s help, but seem to have sought and 
found comfort in the ancient covenant promises. In 
the German empire and Switzerland this was apparently 
the case among the so-called Wiedertaufer, or Anabap- 
tists. In fact, the church covenant idea may even have 
been made use of among the various Christian brother- 
hoods, of which in the century preceding the Reforma- 
tion, and even farther back, we find many traces. But 
the Anabaptists, at any rate, were evidently acquainted 
with the idea. 

In the year 1523, in a book written by Hans Locher, 
entitled ‘Azn tzettlang geschwigner christlicher Bruder,” 
occurs the following: “If indeed, we have borne in 
us the likeness of the Father since the creation and if 
indeed we have given ourselves over to faith and service 
and have praised and sworn in baptism, after we received 
the garment of blamelessness, to work for the Lord’s 
profit, to avoid evil and to do good ; therefrom will fol- 


14 


low our duty to obey his will with all possible industry.” ! 
This was written unmistakably by an Anabaptist, as bap- 
tism is spoken of so prominently ; but this brotherhood 
evidently had had an existence for some time, at least, 
before the Reformation began, and apparently had be- 
come Anabaptist as the Reformation progressed, for the 
writer refers to his memory of the long history of his 
Society (alten Geschichte seiner Gemeinschafe). 

In the above without doubt are the elements of the 
church covenant idea, the members of the brotherhood 
giving themselves over to faith and service, and swear- 
ing, or promising, to work for the Lord’s profit, to avoid 
evil, and to do good. Whether such a covenant was 
employed in this brotherhood before it became Anabap- 
tist in belief, or in others that went through a like ex- 
perience, is an open question. 

The church covenant idea seems to have been of slow 
and uncertain evolution, and our knowledge of it in 
these earliest times is but meagre on account of the 
scarcity of printed records. Yet from 1523 to the 
present time one comes in history again and again 
upon this idea, sometimes more, sometimes less, clearly 
expressed. 

The differentiation of Anabaptist churches from all 
other churches or brotherhoods, one may suppose, how- 
ever, did not become entirely clear until the spring of 
1526, when the then leaders of the Anabaptist movement, 


1 The following is the German text from Dr. Karl Rembert’s “ Die‘ Wiedertiufer’ 
im Herzogtum Jilich,”’ Berlin, 1899, p. 105: ‘‘Tragen wir doch das Bildnis des 
Vaters seit der Erschaffung in uns und haben wir uns doch zum Glauben und zur 
Dienstbarkeit erkannt und haben gelobt und geschworen in der Taufe, nachdem wir 
das Kleid der Unschuld haben empfapgen, dem Herrn seinen Nutzen zu schaffen, 
abzuweichen dem Bésen und zu wirken das Gute; will daraus folgern unsere Pflicht, 
mit moglichstem Fleiss seinem Willen nachzukcmmen.” 


15 


meeting at the chapter session in Augsburg, agreed 
that baptism on profession of faith should be the sign 
of membership in their churches.’ 

The idea of a society of brothers in union or covenant 
with God comes out quite distinctly in a book containing 
a letter of the well-known Anabaptist, Michael Satler, 
printed in 1527. The book is entitled “ Briderlich 
ver | eynigung etzlicher kinder Gottes | steben Artickel 
betreffend.” A copy may be found in the Royal Library 
in Berlin. From the three excerpts from this book, 
given in full in the notes, it will be seen that the Ana- 
baptists, who met in 1527 at ‘“‘Schlatten am Randen”’ 
(in Austria ?) evidently made use of an informal agree- 
ment, at least, between one another and themselves and 
God, for they were united together in a brotherhood, 
and had agreed to seven articles. They had further 
evidently covenanted with God to do his will, and had 
been admitted into the “body of Christ,” or the church 
of God, by baptism.’ 

It may here be remarked, that an abridged text of the 
“Seven Articles” above mentioned has been preserved, 
and was printed in 1883 in Dr. Josef Beck’s work, en- 
titled “Die Geschichts-Biicher der Wiedertiufer in Oester- 


(2 eee ae 


1 See Rembert, p. 433, Note 2. It will be noticed, however, that Doctor Rembert 
speaks of the Anabaptist Church. The Anabaptists formed churches, but not a 
church in the sense of the Presbyterian Church, or the Methodist Episcopal Church. 


2 The text from which the above statement is taken reads: P. 2: ‘‘ Lieben briider 
und schwestern | wir | die da versamlet seint gwesen im herrn zu Schlatten am Randen 
miteinander in stiicken un artickeln| thun kundt allen liebhabern Gottes | dz wir 
vereynigt seint worden | so uns betreffen im Herren zu halten | als die gehorsamen 
Gottes kinder.”’ 

Pp. 5,6: “dz wir nit gemeynschafft mit inen haben | un mit inen lauffen in die ge- 
menge irer greweln | das ist also | Dweil alle (die nit getrette seint in die gehorsame dess 
glaubens | un die sich nit vereynigt haben mit Got | dz sy seinen willen thun wollen).”’ 

P. 5: “ Und alle die von eynem tranck trincken wollen zu einer gedechtnuss dess 
vergossnen bluts Christi | die sollen vorhin vereinigt sein in eynen leip Christi | dz ist | 
in dy gemeyn Gottes | uff welche Christus dz haupt ist | nemlich durch den tauff,’’ 


16 


veich-Ungarn.” + It will be noticed that these “Seven 
Articles’? are not merely articles of faith, or exactly a 
church or brotherhood covenant, but contain elements 
and characteristics of both. The first article is merely 
an article of faith on “late” or adult baptism, but all the 
following articles, except the third, begin, after the num- 
ber of the article, with the words, “set wir vereinigt 
wordten”’ (“we have agreed,” or ‘we have become 
united,” here practically equivalent to ‘“we are united 
together by agreement, or covenant’’). The third article 
begins, “Ju dem brotbrechen seint wir eins worden vnd 
verainhart’”’ (“In the breaking of bread [at Communion] 
we became one and were united”). In these “Seven 
Articles”? then, the characteristics of ordinary articles 
of faith and of a covenant are inseparably mingled. 

The characteristics of a covenant appear most clearly 
in the fourth section, which may be given, though the 
text of the whole seven articles is too extended to be 
inserted here. Article IV. reads :? 


In the fourth place: We have agreed [have covenanted] con- 
cerning separation from evil and wickedness, which the devil has 
planted in the world, namely that we will not have association 
with them, and will [not] walk with them in their many abomina- 
tions. Now also to us is the command of the Lord manifest, in 


1 Pp. 41-44. 

2 The German text reads: “Zum vierden: Seint wir vereignigt worden von der 
absinderung von dem bésen vnd vom argen, das der teuffl in der welt gepflanzt hat, 
also das wir nit gemainschafft mit inen haben, vnd mit inen (nit) laufen in die gemenge 
irer gretil—_Nun ist vns auch das gebot des herren offenbar, in welchem er vns haist 
abgesindert sein, wellen wir seine siine vnd téchter sein ; weiter vermant er vns darumb: 
von babilon vnd dem Irdischen Egipto aus zu geen, das wir nicht thailhafftig werden 
irer qual ynd leiden, so der herr iiber sie fiieren wirt. Dis grauel, welche wir meiden 
sollen—in den werden vermaint alle babstliche vnd widerbabstliche werckh vnd gotes 
dienste, versamlung, kiirchgang, , . vnd andere mer dergleichen, die dan die welt fir 
hoch helt ;—von diesem allem sollen wir abgesindert werden, vnd kain tail mit solchem 
haben, denn es sein eitel grauel, die yns verhasst machen vor vnserem Christo Jesu, 
welcher yns entledigt hat von der dienstbarkeit des fleisches’’ (pp. 42, 43). 


17 


which he calls us to be separated [from the world], if we wish to 
be his sons and daughters ; further he warns us therefore : to flee 
from Babylon and the land of Egypt, that we share not their tor- 
ments and sorrows, which the Lord will bring upon them. The 
abominations,. which we shall avoid—by which are meant all 
papal and anti-papal work and church services, gatheringfs], 
churchway[s], . . and still other of the like, which the world 
now holds in high esteem ; from all this shall we be separated, 
and have no part with such, for they are empty abominations, 
which make us hateful before our Christ Jesus, who has released 
us from the bondage of the flesh. 


These “Seven Articles of Schlatten am Randen, 
agreed to on February 24, 1527,” afford a good illustra- 
tion of the early use of the covenant idea. 

More clearly do the articles of the Brotherhood of 
Hans Hut, of the date 1527, show that to the early 
Moravian Anabaptists baptism was the sign of a cove- 
nant, or agreement, made with God and the members 
of the church by one seeking admission to its fellowship. 
A part of one of these articles reads : 

“Tr Tauf sey ain zaichen ainer verpundtnuss unnd ver- 
willgung gegen got unnd der cristenlichen gemaindt.” } 
(“Your baptism is a sign of a covenant and surrender 
of will toward God and the Christian church.’’) 

Dr. Balthasar Hubmeier, one of the most prominent 
leaders of the Anabaptists, in a work entitled “ Von der 
briederlichen straff,’ Nicolsburg, 1527, has the following 
passage, which though not containing the word covenant 
yet clearly manifests in his teaching and practice the use 
of the church covenant idea: 


After that the people heard the word of God, received it, gave 


1° Doctor Balthasar Hubmeier und die Anfinge der Weidertaufe in Mahren.” 
By Dr. Johann Loserth. Briinn, 1893, p. 209. 
B 


18 


themselves to him in faith thenceforth to live according to it, they 
bound themselves with water baptism to God publicly before the 
church according to the command of Christ, and promised God 
that in the strength of God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy 
Spirit, they subjected themselves to him, to work and suffer, in 
prosperity and adversity, in joy and suffering, in life and death. 
Yea, as God shall send, they will willingly receive, and with 
Christ suffer, die, and be buried, in hope and confidence of rising 
with him, by the glory of the Father, to walk in newness of life, 
and henceforth not to let sin reign in this mortal body, not to 
obey its lusts, but to present their members to God the Lord as 
instruments and servants of righteousness in obedience, that they 
may be holy and obtain the end, everlasting life, the gift of God 
in Christ Jesus our Lord, and to his glory, honor, and praise in 
eternity, chant and sing, holy, holy, holy. That the people may 
do and accomplish this, they have with public confession of 
Christian faith and with reception of water baptism been in- 
scribed, marked, and incorporated with the assembly of the uni- 
versal church, out of which there is no salvation, as there was 
none out of the ark of Noah.’ 


From the examination of Jakob Kautzen and Wilhelm 
Reublin, 1529,? we obtain further most exceptional 
and unmistakable evidence of the use of what may be 
termed a church covenant among the Anabaptists of 


Strasburg. These men, it will be noticed, in their con- 


1 English translation of the text communicated to the author by Prof. Henry C. 
Vedder, p. p., of Crozer Theological Seminary. 


2« Zur Geschichte der strassburgischen Wiedertiufer in den Jahren 1527 bis 
1543, aus den Vergichtbiichern und anderen archivalischen Quellen.”’ In der 
“Zeitschrift fiir die histor. Theologie. 1860. By Timoth. Wilh. Rohrich. P. 44. 
The German textis: ‘Zum Ersten bekennen wir frei Sffentlich vor Gott und allem 
Volk, dass wir vor diesen Zeiten, da wir Gott nit achteten, wiewohl er sich nit unbe- 
zeugt liess, sammt andern Heiden ein heidnish Leben gefiihrt haben. Aber als uns 
der barmherzige Gott uss Gnaden, durch sein gesandtes Wort, vom Teufel dess Diener 
wir waren, zu ihm und von der Finsternuss darin wir sassen, Zu seinem wunderbar- 
lichen Licht berufet, waren wir der himmlischen Botschaft nit unglaubig, sondern 
machten einen Bund mit Gott in unsern Herzen, ihm hinfiirter in Heilgkeit alle unsere 
Tage, durch sin Kraft zu dienen und solch unser Vornehmen den Bundesgenossen zu 
erdffnen. Haben wir uns auch durch Empfangung des Wassertaufs lassen inlyben 
(einverleiben) als Glieder in den Lychnam, dessen Christus das Haupt ist.”’ 


19 


fession to the magistrates, used just such language as 
has been employed in the expression of the church 
covenant in much later times. They said: 


For the first point we confess freely and openly before God and 
all people, that we formerly with other Heathen led a heathen life, 
when we did not heed God, though He did not leave Himself with- 
out witness. But when God in His mercy and grace, through His 
Word, which He sent, called us from the Devil whose servants we 
were to himself and from the darkness, in which we sat, into his 
marvelous light, we were not unmindful of the heavenly message, 
but made a Covenant (Bund) with God in our hearts, all our days 
by his strength to serve Him henceforth in holiness and to make 
known this our purpose to the covenant members [confederates. ] 
We have also by receiving water baptism had ourselves embodied 
as members into the body of which Christ is the head. 


Melchior Hofmann,’ the last great leader of the Ana- 
baptists, also seems not only gladly to have adopted the 
church covenant idea, but to have brought it into greater 
prominence in his teaching than any before him. In 
1530 appeared his “ Die Ordonnantie Godts.’* In this 
he expresses the view that “the children of God and 


1 The two best works on Hofmann are that in German, entitled “Melchior Hof- 
mann, ein Prophet der Wiedertaufer, von Friedrich Otto zur Linden. Haar- 
lem, 1885,’ and that in Dutch, entitled “Melchior Hofmann door W’. I. Leendertz, 
Predikant bij de Doopsgezinde Gemeente te Veenwouden. Haarlem, De Erven 
F. Bohn. 188}3.”’ 


2 This work, says Leendertz, pp. 225, 226, was first ‘written in the dialect which 
is spoken in East Friesland and along the coast of the Baltic Sea by the inhabitants 
of the Dutch provinces known as the ‘ Eastern’ [tongue] (het ‘Oostersch’). Original 
copies of this manifest have not been preserved. We know it alone from a later 
Dutch translation under the title: Die Ordonnantie Godts, dewelke hij door synen 
soone Christum Jesum inghestelt ende bevesticht heeft op die waarachtighe discipelen 
des eeuwigen woort Godes. Door Melchior Hofmann. ‘Ten eerste gedruckt Anno 
1530. Ende nu door een liefhebber der gerechtigheyt wt het Oostersche in het Neder- 
duytsche ghetrouwelyck overgeset. Eccles. VI. De wysheit is bitter den onghe- 
schickten Menschen ende een rockeloos Mensche en blijft niet bij haer. Tot Amster- 
dam, Claes Gerretsz Boeckvercooper in het Medicijn-Boeck opt Water bij den Koren- 
marckt oft op die nieuwe Brugghe in die Kas 1611.” ; 


20 


brothers of Jesus ought to become his followers.” : 
After they have given themselves to the Lord, “they 
ought to allow themselves to be led out of the world, 
the realm of Satan, and openly, without reticence or 
fear of men, let themselves be joined with Christ by 
means of the ‘true covenant-sign,’ the water-bath of 
baptism in order from that time on to be obedient alone 
to the will of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” ’ 

Hofmann obtained his view of baptism as the sign of 
the covenant from Strasburg Anabaptist circles,* but 
although he agrees with them in looking at the relation 
between God and man as a covenant (Bund), yet in this 
he is original, that he characterizes this union especially 
as a marriage covenant (Ehedund*), and states that in 
the Lord’s Supper the Lord offers to his bride a piece 
of bread as a ring.° 


As the covenant idea (Bundesgedanke) formed the founda- 
tion for Hofmann’s teaching concerning justification, baptism, 
and the Lord’s Supper, so also is drawn from it the postulate of a 
strict church discipline, which was resultingly characteristic of 
the Dutch Anabaptist churches before all others. ° 

“If we look back again to the contents of this work [of Hof- 
mann’s above mentioned], the most significant and most reason- 
able that Hofmann had written, especially noticeable will appear 
to us the characteristic fact that he founded his system on an 
entirely new thought. It is this, that the whole relation of man 
to God is consummated in the form of a covenant (Bund). On 
this idea was based the religious organization or communion 
which he established in Friesland. One might with propriety 
therefore characterize the same as a covenant church of the last 
days (Bundesgemeinde der letzten Tage). 

For, although Hofmann did not discover the covenant idea, 


1¥, O. zur Linden, p. 243. 2 Ibid. 3 Jbid. 4 Ibid., p. 244. 
5 Jbid., p. 248. 6 Jbid., p. 249. 


2I 


but borrowed it, yet we find no other system at the Reformation 
period which had the same so exclusively for its foundation, and 
in which that idea was so consequently carried out." 


Melchior Hofmann’s ambition was to spread his ideas 
as widely as possible to all lands. His prophetic views 
were of such influence that they led to the founding of 
the ‘‘New Jerusalem” at Minster. There, we may 
therefore well believe, the church covenant idea came to 
be generally known. That this was the fact may be 
seen from the reprint of an early work entitled “ Ge- 
schichte | der | Wiedertaufer | su | Minster in West- 
phalen. | Nebst| einer Beschreibung | der | Haupt- 


stadt dieses Landes. | Aus | einer lateinischen Handa- 
schrift des | Hermann von Kerssenbroick | iibersetst. 
| Zweite Auflage. | 1887.” For though the writer 


was a Roman Catholic, and not a friend of the Anabap- 
tists, yet he gathered into his book a number of articles 
of faith, etc., which purported to be, and probably were, 
written at least in part by the Anabaptists in Munster. 
For instance, he represents ‘‘Rottmann”’ as bringing 
before certain assemblies of the citizens, in 1533, Arti- 
cles of Faith, of which the nineteenth reads : ? 

“Every Christian shall constantly press forward when 
the Christian course has once been begun, and not look 
back, in order that the door be not shut to them ; that 
is, when his father, his mother, his sister, or any relation 
of his, would not accept this teaching [the views of the 
Anabaptists] and the sign of the covenant.” ° 


1F. O, zur linden, p. 252. 2 Jbid., p. 417. 

8 The German text is: ‘‘ Neunzehnter Artikel. Ein jeder Christ solle den einmahl 
angefangenen Lauf ununterbrochen fortsetzen, und nicht zuriick sehen, damit ihnen 
die Thiire nicht verschlossen werde; das ist, wenn sein Vater, seine Mutter, seine 
Schwester, oder sonst einer von seiner Verwandtschaft, diese Lehre und das Zeichen 
des Bundes nicht annehmen wollte.”’ 


22 


In 1534, after “Iohann Bockelsohn von Leiden” had 
been raised to the dignity of “(king over the whole 
earth,” in order that he “might spread the power of his 
kingdom even farther, at the advice of a prophet he 
caused the names of all those who belonged to the New 
Covenant, of both sexes, to be written into a book,” 
says Kerssenbroick, “which I not without cause am 
keeping, for it was given as a present to me by an hon- 
ored man.” ! This book, if preserved, would furnish us 
with probably the first known list of church-members 
united by covenant, though the conception of the New 
Jerusalem was highly Jewish and the covenant people of 
the city were styled Israelites. The idea of the Mun- 
sterites seems to have been to found a Separatist city, and 
later not only a national, but world-embracing church. 
In this book, to which reference has been made, no 
formal covenant or promise probably was written, but 
merely a list of the names of those who by baptism and 
oral or implicit covenant had been admitted to the Ana- 
baptist churches of the city. 

Melchior Hofmann became the head of a great party, 
known after his name as the Melchiorites, and a charac- 
teristic of this party was unquestionably the use of this fa- 
vorite idea of their leader. To be sure, when Minster fell 
in 1535, the popularity of Hofmann waned, yet we hear 
of his followers later fleeing into Holland and England. 
Surely, then, their ideas must have become known in 
these countries. What would have been more natural ? 


1 The text, p. 568, reads: ‘* Damit aber der Konig die Gewalt seines Reichs noch 
besser ausbreitete, so liess er auf Anrathen eines Propheten die Namen aller derjenigen, 
so zu dem neuen Bund gehireten, von beiderlei Geschlecht in ein Buch eintragen, 
welches ich, da es mir von einem ehrlichen Mann ist geschenket worden, nicht ohne 
- Ursache aufhebe.”’ 


23 


In Germany, Switzerland, and Austria the Anabap. 
tists gradually became less numerous by reason of per- 
secution, yet for some time after the fall of Munster 
many probably remained in their native countries. So, 
also, their ideas survived for some time. Even as late 
as 1566, from the Acts of the trial of Goddert Schneider, 
of Bergheim, we know that the Anabaptists continued 
to make use of the church covenant, though evidently 
even at this date it was in general exceedingly informal. 
He was asked forty-three questions, of which the nine- 
teenth * was : 


What must one promise on entrance into what you call Chris- 
tian covenant ? 

Answer : One does not need to take an oath, but when any 
one accepts baptism in their [the Anabaptists’] church, one must 
believe that he will remain a member, and not desert, and if one 
should also lose his life because of his membership, and even 
should be taken prisoner for the same cause, one should hold fast 
and not make known his fellow [or covenant] brothers and sisters. 


The Anabaptists, after the fall of Minster in 1535, 
divided into various parties, out of which finally emerged 
the Mennonites, who have preserved until the present 
the best qualities of the early Anabaptists. Whether 
the Mennonites accepted the church covenant idea at 
first, it is difficult to determine. It would seem natural 
that they should, yet Professor Dr. Cramer, of Amster- 
dam, says that he does not know whence the church 
covenant idea (Taufbundesgedanke) came, and that it 


1 The text from Rembert, p. 509, note 1, reads as follows: ‘‘Was man bei der 
Aufnahme versprechen miisse in, wie sie es nennen, christlichen Bund? . . Antwort: 
Keinen Eid brauchten sie zu leisten, sondern wenn jemand die tauf in irer gemeindt 
angenommen, so miissen die globen, daby zu verbleiben und darvon nit abzustehen, 
und wenn sie auch das leben dariiber verlieren sollten, und sovern sie dariiber gefangen 
wiirden, sollen sie festhalten und ihre mitbroeder und siistern nit melden,”” 


24 


‘does not appear in Menno.” Doctor Cramer is, how- 
ever, evidently thinking of a set church covenant for- 
mula, or more probably of articles of faith, for he con-. 
tinues: “Such a formula as you mean does not appear 
in the sixteenth century. At the beginning of the sev- 
enteenth century people began to demand answers to 
questions which agreed,” but “one may not speak of a 
generally accepted formula.” “With a part of the 
Mennonites called the ‘Alte Flamengen, the church 
covenant idea was, during the seventeenth and eight- 
eenth centuries, very prominent.””! 

Yet in this letter, as already has been suggested, Pro- 
fessor Cramer seems to have in mind articles of faith, 
not a church covenant such as we now have, and, there- 
fore, with no direct evidence at hand on this point, we 
can say merely that it seems probable that the early 
Mennonites were acquainted at least with an idea so 
characteristic of the Anabaptists. 

From the “Racovian Catechism,’ composed about 
1590 by the Polish anti-trinitarian Anti-Pedobaptists, and 
first issued in 1605, it would seem that the covenant idea 
early met with approval in Poland, though the term 
“covenant” may not have been employed. This fact 
is indicated in the “Racovian”’ definition of baptism, 
which is said to be: 


A rite of initiation whereby men, after admitting his doctrine 
and embracing faith in him, are bound to Christ and planted 
among his disciples or in his church; renouncing the world, with 
its manners and errors, and professing that they have for their 
sole leader and master in religion, and in the whole of their lives 
and conversation the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit who 


1 In a letter to the author, 


25 


spoke by the apostles; declaring and, as it were, representing by 
their very ablution, immersion and emersion, that they design to 
rid themselves of the pollution of their sins, to bury themselves 
with Christ, and therefore to die with him and rise again to new- 
ness of life; binding themselves down in order than [that] they 
may do this in reality; and at the same time, after making this 
profession and laying themselves under this obligation, receiving 
the symbol and the sign of the remission of their sins, and so far 
receiving the remission itself. ! 


1 Prof. Albert Henry Newman, ‘‘A History of Anti-Pedobaptism.”’ Philadel- 
phia, 1897, p. 338. 


26 


CHAPTER If 


THE CHURCH COVENANT IDEA AMONG THE 
SCOTCH REFORMERS 


\ \ YHETHER direct influence from the Anabaptists 

was felt at this early period in Scotland is un- 
certain. To be sure they came over into England, but 
direct evidence that they ever went as far north as Scot- 
land, or ever spread abroad their literature there, is not 
easy to find. The view of the Anabaptists, however, that 
infants should not be baptized must have been known in 
Scotland at an early period of the Reformation, for from 
1530 various confessions’ had been published on the 
continent and sent into foreign lands to give warning 
against this pernicious sect, as it was then regarded. 
Possibly, prompted simply by these warnings, and wish- 
ing to show their sympathy with other State churches, or 
possibly because Anabaptists were actuaily in the country 
and therefore to be feared, the Scotch reformers in 1561 
published a Confession of Faith, prepared in the preced- 
ing year, which refers to the Anabaptists as follows : 


VVe confesse and acknowledge that baptisme ap- 
perteaneth as well to the infants of the faithfull as vnto 
them that be of age and discrecion. 

And so we dampne the error of the anabaptistes 


1 See Dr. Philip Schaff’s “‘Creeds of Christendom.”” New York, 1877, Vol. III., 
pp. 13, 17, 18, 173, 291, 306. 


26 


27 


who deneyeth baptisme to apperteaine to children, before 
that they haue faith and vnderstanding. 


Is it, then, unreasonable also to suppose that other of 
their ideas had by this time become known? At any 
rate it is interesting to note that the covenant idea was 
quite as prominent among the early Scotch reformers as 
among the Anabaptists, and that words apparently from 
the same root, sometimes at least, were employed by 
them to indicate the word “covenant.’’ The Anabaptist 
expression was Bund, the Scotch, Band or Bond. Was 
this a mere coincidence or not? Or might the covenant 
idea have come into Scotland from quite another source, 
namely, through Calvinism? The problem of the origin 
of the Scotch covenant idea may be unsolvable, but the 
fact remains of the frequent use of so-called covenants, 
and of the forming of parties called Covenanters, so 
numerous and powerful as to determine the church 
polity of the Scotch nation. 

In speaking of the early covenants, James Kerr, D. D., 
says’ that the people of Scotland “were led to bind 
themselves together in ‘bands,’ or covenants, and to- 
gether to God, in prosecution of their aims. At Dun, 
in 1556, they entered into a ‘Band’ in which they 
vowed to ‘refuse all society with idolatry.” At Edin- 
burgh, in 1557, they entered into ‘ane Godlie Band,’ 
vowing that ‘we, by his grace, shall, with all diligence, 
continually apply our whole power, substance, and our 
lives to maintain, set forward, and establish the most 
blessed word of God.’ At Perth, in 1559, they entered 
into covenant ‘to put away all things that dishonor his 


1In “ The Covenants and the Covenanters.’” Edinburgh, 1895, pp. 12, 13. 


28 


name that God may be truly and purely worshiped.’ 
At Edinburgh, in 1560, they entered into covenant ‘to 
procure, by all means possible, that the truth of God’s 
word may have free passage within this realm.’ And 
these covenants were soon followed by the Confession 
of Faith prepared by Knox and five other reformers, 
and acknowledged by the three Estates as ‘ wholesome 
and sound doctrine grounded upon the infallible truth 
of God?” 

Fortunately the text of all the important Scotch Cove- 
nants has been preserved. The one signed in the winter 
of 1557 by the early reformers, known as the First 
Covenant, reads as follows: 


We, perceiving how Satan, in his members, the Antichrists of 
our time, cruelly doth rage, seeking to overthrow and to destroy 
the evangel of Christ and His Congregation, ought, according to 
our bounden duty, to strive in our Master's cause even unto the 
death, being certain of the victory in Him. The which our duty 
being well considered, we do promise, before the majesty of God 
and His Congregation, that we (by his grace) shall with all dili- 
gence continually apply our whole power, substance, and our 
very lives, to maintain, set forward, and establish the most blessed 
Word of God and His Congregation; and shall labour at our pos- 
sibility to have faithful ministers purely and truly to minister 
Christ's evangel and sacraments to His people. We shall main- 
tain them, nourish them, and defend them, the whole Congrega- 
tion of Christ, and every member thereof, at our whole powers 
and wearing of our lives, against Satan, and all wicked power 
that does intend tyranny or trouble against the foresaid Congrega- 
tion. Unto the which Holy Word and Congregation we do join 
us, and also do forsake and renounce the congregation of Satan, 
with all the superstitious abomination and idolatry thereof; and, 
moreover, shall declare ourselves manifestly enemies thereto, by 
this our faithful promise before God, testified to His Congregation, 


29 


by our subscriptions at these presents. At Edinburgh, the 3d day 
of December 1557 years. ! 

‘A great advance was reached,’’ says Doctor Kerr, ‘‘by the 
National Covenant of 1580. This National Covenant, or Second 
Confession of Faith was prepared by John Craig. . . Its original 
title was ‘Ane Short and Generall Confession of the True Chris- 
tiane Faith and Religione, according to God’s verde and Actis of 
our Perlamentis, subscryved by the Kingis Majestie and his House- 
hold, with sindrie otheris, to the glorie of God and good example 
of all men, att Edinburghe, the 28 day of Januare, 1580, and 14 
yeare of his Majestie’s reigne.? 


This covenant was subscribed again in 1590 and 1596, 
and was renewed February 28, 1638, and ‘was tran- 
scribed into hundreds of copies, carried throughout the 
country from north to south and east to west, and sub- 


3 The National Covenant, as 


scribed everywhere.” 
finally renewed, is a long document, containing two ad- 
ditions to the original covenant, one summarizing the 
Acts of Parliament, the other consisting of special re- 
ligious articles for the time. The following quotations 4 


will furnish some idea of the nature of this covenant: 


We all and every one of us under-written, protest, 
That, after long and due examination of our own con- 
sciences in matters of true and false religion, we are 
now thoroughly resolved in the truth by the Spirit and 
Word of God : and therefore we believe with our hearts, 
confess with our mouths, subscribe with our hands, and 
constantly affirm, before God and the whole world, that 


1 Text from ‘‘ The History of Scotland.’’ By John Mill Burton. Edinburgh and 
London, 1867, p. 58. On p. 57 Mr. Burton says: “In the winter of 1557 they [the 
Scotch Reformers] adopted a plan which we have seen in practice in Scotland from 
a very early day. Many of them signed a band or bond to co-operate with each other 
for the purposes set forth in the document. This was termed the First Covenant.’’ 


2“The Covenants and the Covenanters.”” By James Kerr, p. p., Edinburgh, 
1895, p. 13. 
3 Jbid., p. 18. 4 Jbid., pp. 39-51. 


30 

this only is the true Christian faith and religion, pleasing 
God, and bringing salvation to man, which now is, by 
the mercy of God, revealed to the world by the preach- 
ing of the blessed evangel; and is received, believed, 
and defended by many and sundry notable kirks and 
realms, but chiefly by the Kirk of Scotland, the King’s 
Majesty, and three estates of this realm, as God’s eter- 
nal truth, and only ground of our salvation. . . 

We Noblemen, Barons, Gentlemen, Burgesses, Ministers 
and Commons under-written, . . do hereby profess, and 
before God, His angels, and the world, solemnly declare, 
That with our whole hearts we agree, and resolve all the 
days of our life constantly to adhere unto and to defend 
the aforesaid true religion, and (forbearing the practice 
of all novations . . .) to labour, by all means, to recover 
the purity and liberty of the Gospel, as it was established 
and professed before the foresaid novations. .. And 
therefore, from the knowledge and conscience of our 
duty to God, toour King and country, without any worldly 
respect or inducement, so far as human infirmity will 
suffer, wishing a further measure of the grace of God 
for this effect; we promise and swear, by the GREAT 
NAME OF THE LORD OUR GOD, to continue in the profes- 
sion and obedience of the aforesaid religion. . . 

And because we cannot look for a blessing from God 
upon our proceedings, except with our profession and 
subscription we join such a life and conversation as be- 
seemeth Christians who have renewed their covenant 
with God ; we therefore faithfully promise for ourselves, 
our followers, and all others under us, both in public, 
and in our particular families, and personal carriage, to 
endeavour to keep ourselves within the bounds of Chris- 
tian liberty, and to be good examples to others of all 
godliness, soberness, and righteousness, and of every 
duty we owe to God and man. 

And, that this our union and conjunction may be 
observed without violation, we call the Livine Gop, THE 
SEARCHER OF OUR HEartTs, to witness, who knoweth this 


31 


to be our sincere desire and unfeigned resolution, as we 
shall answer to Jesus Curist in the great day, and under 
pain of God’s everlasting wrath, and of infamy and loss 
of all honour and respect in this world : most humbly 
beseeching the Lorp to strengthen us by his Hoty 
SpirIT for this end, and to bless our desires and _ pro- 
ceedings with a happy success; that religion and right- 
eousness may flourish in the land, to the glory of God, 
the honour of our King, and peace and comfort of us 
all. In witness whereof, we have subscribed with our 
hands all the premises. 


The last and most important covenant made in Scot- 
land is that called the ‘Solemn League and Covenant’’ 
of 1643. One of the original copies! of this is in the 
Manuscript Department of the British Museum. It is 
written on a roll of parchment several feet long, and 
about eight inches wide. In this document there are six 
articles, and a seventh, or conclusion, introduced by 
“And.” Below the articles are two long parallel rows 
of names and marks signed by Covenanters. 

The roll begins : 


A Solemn League and Couenant for reformation and 
defence of religion the honour and happinesse of the 
Kinge and the peace and safety of the three Kingdomes 
of England Scotland and Ireland wherein wee all sub- 
scribe and each one of vs for himselfe w our hands 
lifted vpp to the most high God, doe swear. . . 

1. First that wee... 


The long closing section is as follows : 


And because theis Kingdomes are guilty of many 
sinnes and proucacOns against God and his sonne Jesus 


1 The Press mark is ADDL. MS. 9373, 288B. 


32 


Christ, as is too manifest by our p™sent distresses and 
dangers the fruts thereof wee professe and declare before 
God and the world our vnfained desire to bee humbled 
for our owne sines and for the sines of theis Kingdomes, 
especially that we haue not as wee ought, valued the in- 
estimable Benefitt of the Gospel that wee haue not 
labored for the purity and power thereof and that wee have 
not endeauoured to receiue Christ in our harts nor to 
walk worthy of him in our liues w are the causes 
of other sines and transgessions soe much aboundinge 
amongst vs: And our true and vnfained purpose, desire, 
and endeauor for our selues, and all other vnder our 
power and charge both in publike and in priuate in all 
duties wee owe to God and man to amend our Liues and 
each one to goe before another in the example of A reall 
reformacon that the Lord may turne away his wrath & 
heauie indignacon & establish these Churches and King- 
domes in truth and peace. And this couenant wee 
make in the p™sence of Almyghty God the searcher of 
all harts w" a true intencon to reforme the same, as wee 
shall answer at the great day when the secrets of all 
harts shall be disclosed most humbly besseechinge the 
Lord to strengthen vs w™ his holy Spirit for this end, & 
to blesse our desires & proceedings w™ such successe as 
may be deliu*ance and safety to his people & encourag- 
ment to other christian Churches groaninge vnder, or in 
danger of the yoke of Antichristian tyranny to Joyne in 
the same, or like assoc4c6n and couenant to the glory of 
God the enlargment of the Kingdome of Jesus Christ 
and the peace and tranquilitie of Christian Kingdomes 
and common wealth. 


[Dated Mar: 3, 1643.] 


These are the chief Scottish covenants. To the Scotch 
people they are, indeed, of inestimable significance, for 
they are, one may say,*practically the foundation on 
which modern Scotland rests, and they have given it in 


33 


large measure those hardy characteristics which have 
distinguished it from all other countries, even to this 
day. These were not church covenants in the nar- 
rower sense in which the term came to be used in Eng- 
land, Holland, and America, but the earliest were signed 
by the inhabitants of cities and districts, then later by 
the people of the nation, the Solemn League and Coy- 
enant being accepted also even by Parliament. On 
these later covenants the Scottish National Presbyte- 
rian Church is based. 

In the history of the development of the church cov- 
enant idea the Scotch covenants are important, as indi- 
cating how early the idea of written covenant documents 
to be signed was manifested, and how rapidly it grew 
and expanded. The Scotch custom marks a great ad- 
vance in the evolution of the covenant when compared 
with the informal practice of the Anabaptists on the 
Continent. 

Besides the fact that these covenants were somewhat 
extended written documents to be signed, the follow- 
ing points should be especially noted in the examina- 
tion of them: 

First, a promise of men before God, his congregation, 
angels, and the world, to devote their lives to the up- 
building of the church. 

Secondly, a promise to renounce the congregation of 
Satan. | 
Thirdly, the wish, stated in that of 1643, of “ encour- 
agment to other Christian churches groaninge vnder, or 
in danger of the yoke of Antichristian tyranny to Joyne 
in the same, or like assocac6n and couenant.” 


Fourthly, a covenant may be renewed. 
C 


34 


OMAP? ERT 


ROBERT BROWNE AND HIS VIEWS CONCERNING THE 
CHURCH ‘COVENANT 


HE next stage in the development of the church 
covenant idea is connected with the Brownist 
movement in England and Holland. First, it is neces- 
sary, therefore, to give some account of Robert Browne,! 
from whom the Brownists derived their name, also to 
consider his views on the church covenant. 
Though a thinker of considerable ability, Robert 
Browne” was a man to be admired neither for stability 


1 For a more extended account of Robert Browne’s life see Prof. Williston 
Walker’s “‘ History of the Congregational Churches in the United States.” New 
York. 1894. 


2 In the summer of rgor, the writer found in the British Museum a volume largely 
composed of letters in manuscript. One of these was signed “‘ Your Worships humble 
to commaund. Robert Browne | written this last of December : 1588.’ It consisted of 
twelve folio pages, the text of the letter covering nine of them. It was in the main 
beautifully and compactly written in an uncommonly legible hand for that period, and 
on the back of the last leaf, in the rather scrawly writing of another but contemporary 
hand, were the words: ‘‘ Mt Brownes aunswer to Mr Flowers letter; for his iugdement 
in diverse particular pointes in this letter you may not accompte of it: for he hath 
reformed them & hym selfe likwise. The wordes to be looked vppe I haue rase 
[underlined] wth my pen.’”” The writer at once noticed the excellent preservation of 
this letter, the clean, untorn pages, the regular writing, unmistakably like the fac- 
simile of Robert Browne’s signature to be seen in Dr. Henry Martyn Dexter’s ‘The 
Congregationalism of the Last Three Hundred Years,’’ and further the interesting 
character of some of the material in the letter. : 

About a year later, on the writer’s return to England, the volume again came 
under his notice. Once more he became interested in this manuscript and desiring 
to gain a greater familiarity with the peculiar handwriting of that period, he deter- 
mined to begin to decipher this document, and if it proved valuable, to read it through, 
and to make at the same time a legible transcript. He commenced the task at once. 
Several days passed ; a good part of the manuscript had been transcribed, when one 
evening he happened to think it might be worth while to see if Dr. Dexter knew of the 
existence of this particular letter. He had not read far in that learned specialist's 


35 


of character nor for wisdom of conduct. He could not 
be called a great leader, for he was rash and impulsive. 
It was probably in 1579, while pastor of a church in 
Cambridge, that he became a Separatist. At any rate, 
about 1580 he left Cambridge for Norwich, where, in 
company with a university acquaintance, Richard Har- 
rison,' he perfected his theories of church polity and 
soon formed a church. This was also the same year 
that the Scotch were signing their National Covenant 
for the first time. Robert Browne did not long re- 
main at Norwich, but on account of the opposition of 
the Bishop of Norwich and of Richard Bancroft, after- 
ward Archbishop of Canterbury, with the greater part of 
his church, emigrated to Middelburg, Zealand.? It has 
been said that Browne went to Holland in order to be- 
come better known,*® but whether this be true or not, 
he did probably come into closer connection with Ana- 
baptist enEah |S which may have given him added sug: 


great work when he came to the passages cited by him from Richard Bancroft’ Ss ser- 
mon. As he looked over the letter it seemed to the writer that he was reading strangely 
familiar words, and he realized with a start of surprise that he had been deciphering 
the original of this very lost treatise, and glancing over the text of the letter more 
closely he saw that the underlined passage quoted included both of the citations in 
Bancroft’s sermon. Then he read these words in the scrawly hand on the back of the 
last leaf of the letter: ‘‘ The wordes to be looked vppe I have rase [underlined] wt my 
pen,” and then with sudden intuition he saw that Bancroft had quoted from this very 
letter, and that it had never been printed, so that it was no wonder Dr. Dexter did 
not even know the title of this lost Treatise, for it never had a title. 

The writer made known his discovery to the Congregational Historical Society, 
London, and Browne’s letter, under the title, ““ A New Year’s Guift, an Hitherto Lost 
Treatise by Robert Browne,’’ was published by the Society at the close of 1903. For 
a list of Browne’s writings, see this publication, pp. 6, 7; also for the writer’s view of 
the historical value of this newly discovered writing by Browne, see pp. 15-18. 


1 Doctor Dexter may have been mistaken in regard to Harrison’s first name. 
Professor Arber and the British Museum catalogue call him Richard Harrison. He 
is known as Richard Harrison to the majority of early writers whose works the author 
has seen. 


2 See “A New Year’s Guift, an Hitherto Lost Treatise by Robert Browne,” p. 17. 


8 See Dr. H. M. Dexter’s “ Congregationalism of the Last Three Hundred Years,” 
New York, 1880, p. 73. 


36 


gestions for his work, printed in 1582, entitled “A 
Booke | WuicH SHEWETH,” etc., the most important 
of his writings. | 

In 1583 Robert Browne went over to Scotland with 
several followers, as he felt justly conscious that his pas- 
torate in Middelburg had been by no means a success. 
But he met only with opposition, and in 1584 he returned 
to England and was there imprisoned. After his release. 
he was excommunicated by the Bishop of Peterborough 
in 1586, but later in the same year he was made head of 
a grammar school in Southwark, having agreed to sub- 
mit to the authority of the English Church. In 1591 
he was made rector of the village of Achurch-cum- 
Thorpe, where he lived during most of the remaining 
forty years of his life. He died between 1631 and 
1633 in Northampton jail, in which he had been con- 
fined for resisting the collection of a debt. 

So much concerning the outward facts of his life. 
We may now turn to his epoch-making work, “A Booke 
| Waich SHEWETH THE | fe and manners of all true 
Christians, | and howe vnlike they are vnto Turkes and 
Papistes | and Heathen folke. | By me, Robert 
Browne, | Middelbvrgh, | § Imprinted by Richarde 
Painter. | 1582.” 

There are about ten short sections of this work, 
which it is essential for us here to examine. They are 
the following : 


1. Wherefore are we called the people of God and 
Christians? Because that by a willing Couenaunt made 


1 Browne’s troubles in his church at Middelburg are fully described in a ‘ Trve 
and Short Declaration, both of the Gathering and Ioyning together of certaine Per- 
sons; and also of the Lamentable Breach and Division which fell amongst Them.” 
Lambeth Palace Library, London. (Press mark, 4o. 2. 23.) 


37 


with our God, we are vnder the gouernement‘of God and 
Christe, and thereby do leade a godly and christian life. 

[Definition on section 1.] Christians are a companie 
or number of beleeuers, which by a willing couenaunt 
made with their God, are vnder the gouernement of 
God and Christ, and keepe his Lawes in one holie com- 
munion: Because they are redeemed by Christe vnto 
holines & happines for euer, from whiche they were 
fallen by the sinne of Adam. 

36. Howe must the churche be first planted and 
gathered vnder one kinde of gouernement ? 

First by a couenant and condicion, made on Gods 
behalfe. 

Secondlie by a couenant and condicion made on 
our behalfe. , 

Thirdlie by vsing the sacrament of Baptisme to 
seale those condicions, and couenantes. 

[ Definition on section 36.] The couenant on God’s 
behalf is his agreement or partaking of condicions 
with vs that if we keepe his lawes, not forsaking his 
gouernment, hee will take vs for his people, & blesse 
vs accordingly. 

37. What is the couenant, or condicion on Gods 
behalfe? His promise to be our God and sauiour, if we 
forsake not his gouernement by disobedience. 

Also his promise to be the God of our seede, while we 
are his people. Also the gifte of his spirit to his children 
as an inwarde calling and furtheraunce of godlines. 

[Definition on section 37.] His promise to his church, 
is his sure couenant, remembred, taught, and held by 
the church, and the seede thereof: whereby it onely 
hath assurance of saluation in Christ. 

38. What is the couenant or condicion on our behalfe ? 

We must offer and geue vp our selues to be of the 
church and people of God. 

We must likewise offer and geue vp our children and 
others, being vnder age, if they be of our households 
and we haue full power ouer them, We must make 


38 


profession, that we are his people, by submitting our 
selues to his lawes and gouernement. 

[ Definition on section 38.] The couenaunt on our be- 
halfe, is our agreement and partaking of conditions with 
God, That he shal be our God so long as wee keepe vnder 
his gouernement, and obey his lawes, and no longer. 

39. How must Baptisme be vsed as a seale of this 
couenaunt ? 

They must be duelie presented, and offered to God 
and the church, which are to be Baptised. 

They must be duelie received vnto grace and fellowship. 

[Definition on section 39.] Baptisme is a Sacrament 
or marke of the outwarde church, sealing vnto vs by the 
wasshing of our bodies in water, and the word accord- 
ingly preached, our suffering with Christ to die vnto 
sinne by repentance, and our rising with him to liue vnto 
righteousnes, and also sealing our calling, profession, 
and happines gotten by our faith in our victorie of the 
same [esus Christ. 

[Definition on section 43.] Baptising into the bodie 
and gouernement of Christ, is when the parties Baptised 
are receyued vnto grace and fellowshippe, by partaking 
with the church in one Christian communion. 


The above are all the sections of the book which 
especially concern us, except the definition on section 
35, which is merely a restatement of the definition on 
section I, quoted above. 

What, then, is the sum of the contents of these passages ? 

1. What is termed a “covenant”? may properly be used 
in organizing Christian churches. . 

2. This “covenant’’ is called a “willing covenant,” as 
distinguished from a compulsory covenant. (The word 
church covenant is not employed.) 

3. This covenant is made with God. 

4. There are two aspects to a covenant by which a 


39 


church may be organized, (1) the agreement on God's 
part to be the God of the people covenanting, if they 
keep his laws; (2) the united agreement of the people 
desiring to form a church to give up themselves and 
their children to be the church and people of God. 

5. The sacrament of baptism, as the seal of the cove- 
nant, is to be administered to all those who desire to 
form any particular church. 

We may now properly ask, whether Robert Browne 
is entirely or partly original in this work, or whether the 
ideas here expressed are in general borrowed from others 
who had preceded him, but more clearly thought out 
than hitherto had been the case. 

With the facts already presented concerning the Ger- 
man Anabaptists and the Scottish Covenanters, it would 
be difficult to believe that Browne’s views on the church 
covenant, at least, were absolutely original. But before 
answering the question more fully, it will be advisable 
to consider for a moment the contents of a book which 
Robert Browne, with his tendencies of mind, may natu- 
rally have read. 

It is entitled “THe Hvmset | and vnfamed confessid 

| of the belefe of certain poore banished | men, 

grounded vpon the holy Scrip- | tures of God, and vp6 
the Articles of | that vndefiled and only vndoubted[ly | 
| true Christian faith, whfich the on-] | ly Catholicke 
(that is to say vni- | uersal) Churche of Christ | pro- 
fesseth.”” At the end of the book are the words, 
“From Wittonburge by Nicholas { Dorcastor. Ann. 
M. D. liiii, [1554] | the xiiii of May.” The pages are 
unnumbered. From this the two following passages 
may be quoted ; 


40 
' This holy vniuersall church, as the sdne in brightness, 
hath beames of light, whereof it commeth to passe, that 
there be also particuler Churches or congregations. 
Where thoughe there be but two or three gathered 
together in y® name of Christe, He is in the myddes 
amonge theim. 

Almightye God (who euer was and is merciful) dyd 
promis him [man] againe euerlastynge lyfe, which was 
laied vp in his owne sonne: but so that (accordyng as 
he, euen God hymselfe by an euerlasting decree, had 
appointed) he wold be satisfyed, recompenced, and paci- 
fied againe, in the obedience of al his commaundementes, 
by the same nature of man: whych because of the cor- 
ruption of sinne, that had entred in to it by disobedience, 
could not fully satisfye the law, and therefore God made 
an euerlasting couenaunt of mercye with mankinde, & 
promysed the blessed seede: namely, that hys owne son 
should put vpon him our nature, and therwith in inno- 
cency, satisfi the law, and bryng vs agayne into the fel- 
lowshyp of that euerlasting lyfe, whyche was lost thorow 
Adams disobediéce. . . 

And what meane we els by thys, but euen to shew 
that it is an horrible thing, & farre out of order, that 
whyle the Lord in this his holy Sacramét [z. ¢., the 
Lord’s Supper] offreth vs so large a couenait of mercy, 
we shal thincke scorne, to kepe the condicions thereof, 
and the rules that he hath prescribed vnto vs. No man 
doubtles (no not in Ciuile matters) would be so serued: 
wher like as it is no bargaine, till both parties be agreed, 
so cOmeth it to no perfect effecte, neither can it stand 
vniesse the duties, codicions & promises be kept. Neuer- 
theles this thing shal appeare muche more euident, if we 
compare the practise of these present miserable dayes, to 
the order of the Lord and his Apostles in the primitiue 
church, & lay thé one agaynst the other. As for the 
perfourmaice of the condicions on hys party, ther is no 
doubt : For wher as he couenanteth with vs in thys holy 
Sacrament, so to feede, nourish, & cdfort our con- 


4! 


sciences, that he wyl euen seale vs vnto him selfe, set 
hys marke vp6 vs, and take vs for hys own. He certi- 
fieth vs assuredly, that vpon such condicions, as we also 
vpon our allegiaunce, are boiid to kepe (whych we must 
either do, or els become vnworthy Receauers to our 
damnatiOo) we haue felowship with him, and are partak- 
ers of the same eternall lyfe, that he hym selfe hath pur- 
chased for vs in hys body and bloud. 


It appears, therefore, that more than twenty-five years 
before Robert Browne wrote ‘A Booke WuicH SHEw- 
ETH’’ there had been printed in English one book, at 
least, which touched indirectly upon various views which 
he later brought out in that work. For instance, the 
idea of particular or congregational churches is hinted 
at, and though the method of organizing such churches 
by covenant is not distinctly given, yet the fundamental 
points from which the church covenant idea might have 
been developed are here clearly delineated. They are 
namely these : God has made a covenant of mercy with 
man on certain “condicions.” This covenant is offered 
in the Lord’s Supper. But there can be no bargain be- 
tween God and men till both parties be agreed, and the 
covenant cannot stand ‘“vnlesse the duties, codicions & 
promises be kept.” In other words, though God has 
made this covenant from his side, yet it is no real cove- 
nant until men accept the ‘“condicions’’ God has im- 
posed, and so make a covenant on their own part, and 
thereby come into fellowship with God. In the sacra- 
ment of the Lord’s Supper God seals men unto himself 
and sets his mark on them. 

The very thought that Browne especially emphasizes, 
namely, that a covenant has two aspects, a God-ward 


42 


and a man-ward, and should be sealed in an outward 
manner, is all here. But there is much that he says 
which is not here, and there are also one or two points 
which he looks at in a different light. Where, then, did 
he obtain his views on the covenant? Were some bor- 
rowed, and the rest. the product of his own thinking? 
Or was he quite original, as evidently by some he has 
been considered ? 

In 1646 Robert Baillie wrote: “The Brownists did 
borrow all their Tenets from the Anabaptists of old.” ? 
In 1645, also, in ‘A Dissvasive from the Errours of the 
Time; shectiad*sard ; 


The Doctrine of the Anabaptists, who in great number fled over 
to England, when for their abominable and horrible Crimes, by 
Fire, and Water, and Sword, they were chased out of both the 
Germanies, is so like, and in many things so much the same with 
the Doctrine of the Brownists, that the derivation of the one from 
the other, seems to be very rational. 


Rev. John Lewis says, also: ” 


About 1580 one Robert Brown a rash forward young man 
espoused the tenet of the German Anabaptists, or the same un- 
charitable opinion of the church of Zxg/and and its bishops and 
pastors, which ¢#ey had conceived of the German protestant and 
Evangelical Churches, and insisted on the necessity of separating 
from them, and gathering new Churches, only with this differ- 
ence, that he did not insist on ¢#ezy being again initiated by a new 
Baptism who joined themselves to him. 


Probably these statements are somewhat exaggerated, 


1 See Robert Baillie’s “‘ Anabaptism, | the True Fovntaine | 
of | UE gi, Antinomy, 
Brownisme, Familisme. . 
London, 1646.’ P. 49. 


2 Rawlinson MSS. C. 410, p. 36 of one of the sections. Bodleian Library. Oxford. 


43 


but there is, doubtless, a measure of truth in them, and, 
in so far as the covenant idea is concerned, Baillie seems 
to be right. We cannot, therefore, believe that Robert 
Browne was as original’ as he has sometimes been repre- 
sented, and that he derived his views on church polity 
largely from a study of the Scriptures, though of course 
the views of dissenters may have suggested to him the 
advisability of studying the Bible, in order to see how 
many of the new ideas could be based on Scripture. At 
any rate, with the material at hand in the work to which 
reference has just been made, and with his probable 
knowledge of the Anabaptist and Scottish church cove- 
nant ideas, Robert Browne had everything ready at hand 
for the publication of such views on the covenant as ap- 
peared in “A Booke WHICH SHEWETH.”’ 


1 Jt may be said, probably, that in general Robert Browne was not the originator 
of so many ideas concerning church polity as has sometimes been supposed, even 
though it should be admitted that he did not obtain all his views from Anabaptists. 
He was from first to last, it would seem, an admirable organizer of material he found 
at hand rather than an originator of new ideas. Even the views that church govern- 
ment may suitably be democratic, and that particular, or congregational, churches 
ought to be equal in power, acknowledging Christ as the only head, and maintaining 
but few officers of the true congregational type, had been printed in English twenty 
years before Browne published ‘‘ A Booke WuICH SHEWETH,” namely, in “ A CoNFES- 

| ston of Fayth, made | by common consent | by diuers reformed | Churches beyonde | 
the Seas: with | an | Exhortation to | the Reformation of | the Churche. | Imprinted at 
Lon- | don by Henry Wykes, | for Lucas Harrison | ’’ [At end of the book] ‘‘156r. the 
ninth | Septemb.”’ 

The following quotations from three consecutive articles, on leaf 109, will be suffi- 
cient to show the truth of the above statement: 

‘29. As concerning the true Churche, we beleue that it ought to be governed, ac- 
cordyng to the policie, that our sauiour Jesus Christ hath established: that is: that 
there bee Pastours, Superintendes, and Deacons, to thende that the puritie of the doc- 
trine maye haue his course, that vices maie bee corrected and repressed, and that the 
poore and afflicted maie bee succoured in their necessities: and that the assemblies 
maie bee made, in the name of God, wherein bothe greate and small maie be edified. 

‘*30. We beleue, that al true pastours, in what place so euer they be, have equal 
power and aucthoritie ynder one onely soueraigne and onely vniuersall bishop Iesus 
Christ: and for this cause, that no Churche oughte to pretend any rule or Lordship 
ouer other. 

“31. We beleue that none ought of his owne authoritie to thrust himselfe into the 
gouernement of the church, but that it ought to be done by election, for that it is pos- 
sible, and God permitteth it.” 


For instance, in connection with the Covenanters in 
Scotland he may first have heard the word covenant 
prominently mentioned in relation to a Christian church. 
In 1580, it will be remembered, the National Covenant 
was signed for the first time, and the expression must 
have become widely known, though at that time it was 
probably not as yet employed by the English Dissenters. 
In the same year, it is now generally admitted, Browne 
very likely came into contact with foreign Anabaptists, 
and doubtless learned their simple ideas of forming their 
brotherhood churches, or societies, by a “Bund,” or 
covenant with God. Their idea was that a church may 
be composed only of believers. Browne accepted this 
view, but, following the opinion of his time in general, 
added “and their seede.’’ Baptism as the sign, or seal, 
of the covenant, also was known to the Anabaptists. 
The view that God’s covenant involved conditions and 
had two aspects, the one God-ward, the other man-ward, 
had been expfessed in English nearly thirty years be- 
fore 1582——a fact which suggests that Anabaptist influ- 
ence began to be felt very early even by the English. 
Robert Browne now took these incoherent ideas and in 
the English tongue welded them into a systematic whole. 
In this respect he was truly an epoch-maker, and may 
justly be said to have given to the English nation for 
the first time a congregational church polity. 

It may here be added that neither Browne nor any 
of his earlier followers seem to have been influenced to 
any great extent by the Scottish covenants. Of course 
early Brownist, or Independent, covenants were written 
sometimes, possibly in general, but direct evidence on 
this point is often wanting. 


45 


CHAPTER IV 


SOME OF THE EARLIEST BROWNIST, OR INDEPENDENT 
COVENANTS 


HE question now arises In what church, composed 

of Englishmen, was a covenant! first employed ? 
One might possibly think, inasmuch as Browne’s book, 
to which reference has previously been made, was pub- 
lished in Middelburg in 1582, that the first covenant 
would probably have been drawn up after that date in 
Holland. But this was not the case, as is shown by 
Robert Browne’s work entitled “A Trve and Short 
Declaration, both of the Gathering and JIoyning to- 
gether of Certaine Persons: and also of the Lament- 
able Breach and Division which fell amongst them,” of 
which probably the only known copy is in Lambeth 


1 Probably one of the earliest expressions of the covenant idea in English occurs 
in “ A Brire AND FayrTu | full declaration of the true | fayth of Christ, made by cer- 
tayne | men susspected of heresye | in these articles folowyng|...|§ Anno. M. D. 
xlvii. | Per me I. B.”’ The writer of this ‘‘ declaration’’ had been suspected of being 
“‘a fauourer of the Anabaptistes.’’ He denies the truth of this charge, and takes the 
same position in regard to baptism later adopted by Robert Browne. But evidently 
he had been strongly influenced by the Anabaptists, and this influence may be seen 
in his definition of baptism, as itself being or implying a “ couenaunt.’’ In the section 
entitled “‘ The Sacrament of Baptysme,”’ this author writes as follows : 

“‘Thyrdely baptysme is a couenant of a good conscience to god. i. Pet. iii. name- 
lye that he that in beliefe is baptised, bindeth him selfe or maketh a couenaunt with 
god: that from thens forth he wyll lyue after hys wyll. And of this couenauntes be- 
halfe, whiche muste be done out of a cleane faythfull herte, hath the baptysme powre, 
and not for the waters sake, wherwith the fylthynesse of the fleshe myghte be washed 
awaye.”’ 

Yet after saying this, and that ‘‘baptisme without fayth may in no wyse be 
broked,”’ the author, nevertheless, affirms that the infant children of believers ought 
to be baptized, 


46 


Palace Library, London. In this book the organization 
of Browne’s church in Norwich, in 1580-1, is described 
as follows :? 


This is to lay the foundacion of Mat. 18. to preach and 
Babtize in the name of the Father teaching to obserue & 
doe, whatsoeuer saieth Christ, I haue commanded you, 
& this is to overthrow the foundacion to teach a tolera- 
tion & practiseing of things, which are cOtraie to the 
whole gouernment & kingdom of Christ, &c. 


THE ORDER AGREED ON FOR THE GVIDING & 


establishing of the companie in all Godlines, & such 
like This doctrine before being shewed to the companie, 
& openlie preached among them manie did agree there- 
to, & though much trouble and persecution did followe, 
yet some did cleaue fast to the trueth, but some Fell 
awaie fro when triall by pursuttes, losses & imprison- 
ment cae, & further increased then Robert, Barker, 
Nicolas Woedowes, Tatsel, Bond & soe others, forsooke 
vs also & held back, and were afraied at the first. There 
was a day appointed & an order taken, for redresse off 
the former abuses, & for cleauing to the Lord in greater 
obediéce. so a covenat was made & ther mutual cdsent 
was geué to hould to gether. 

There were certaine chief pointes proued vnto them 
by the scriptures all which being particularlie rehersed 
vnto them with exhortation they agreed vpon them, & 
pronoiced their agrement to ech thing particularlie, sai- 
ing, to this we geue our consent. First therefore thei 
gaue their consent, to ioine themselues to the Lord, in 
one couenant & felloweshipp together, & to keep & seek 
agrement vnder his lawes & government: and therefore 
did vtterlie flee & auoide such like disorders & wickednes, 
as was mencioned before. Further thei agreed off those 
which should teach them, and watch for the saluation of 


1 Pp 19, 20, 


47 

their soules, whom thei allowed & did chose as able & 
meete ffor that charge. For thei had sufficient triall and 
testimonie thereoff by that which thei hard & sawe by 
them, & had receaued of others. So thei praied for their 
watchfulnes & diligence, & promised their obedience. 

Likewise an order was agreed on ffor their meetinges 
together ffor ther exercises therin, as for praier, thanckes- 
gluing, reading of the Scriptures, for exhortation & edi- 
fing, ether by all men which had the guift or by those 
which had a speciall charge before others. And for the 
lawefulnes off putting forth questions, to learne the 
trueth, as iff anie thing seemed doubtful & hard, to re- 
quire some to shewe it more plainly, or for anie to shewe 
it himselfe & to cause the rest to vnderstand it. Further 
for noting out anie speciall matter of edifiing at the 
meeting, or for tolckig seuerally theret6, with some par- 
ticulars, iff none did require publique audience, or if no 
waightier matter were hadled of others. Againe it was 
agreed that anie might protest, appeale, complaine, ex- 
hort, dispute, reproue &c as he had occasion, but yet in 
due order, which Was then also declared. Also that all 
should further the kingdom off God in themselues, & 
especiallie in their charge & househould, iff thei had 
anie, or in their freindes & companions & whosoeuer was 
Worthie. Furthermore thei particularlie agreed off the 
manner, howe to Watch to disorders, & reforme abuses, 
& for assembling the companie, for teaching priuatlie, & 
for warning and rebukeing both priuatlie & openlie, for 
appointing publick humbling in more rare judgemétes, 
and publik thankesgeuing in straunger blessinges, for 
gathering & testifiing voices in debating matters, & pro- 
pounding them in the name off the rest that agree, for 
an order of chosing teachers, guides & releeuers, when 
thei want, for separating cleane from uncleane, for re- 
ceauing anie into the fellowship, for preséting the dailie 
successe of the church, & the wantes thereof, for seek- 
ing to other churches to haue their help, being better 
reformed, or to bring them to reformation, for taking an 


48 


‘order that none contend openlie, nor persecute, nor 
trouble disorderedly, nor bring false doctrine, nor euil 
cause after once or twise Warning or rebuke. 

Thus all things were handled, set in order & agreed 
on to the comfort off all, & soe the matter wrought & 
prospered by the good hand of God. 


This account gives us at least the substance of the 
first known church covenant made in England. The 
same covenant may have been renewed also in Browne’s 
church after it had moved to Middelburg. 

The substance also, of possibly the next earliest church 
covenant to be found, of the date 1588 or earlier, is 
given in the ‘deposition of William Clerke, taken 8 
March, 1592,” as follows : 


He sayth he hath bene of the forsayd congregation [of Sepa- 
ratists in the neighborhood of London] these foure or fyve years, 
and made promise to stand with the sd. congregation so long as 
they did stand for the truth and glory of God, being then of that 
congregation at that tyme about twenty, or thereabouts. 


After his return from Middelburg in 1592, Francis 
Johnson became pastor of the above-mentioned brother- 
hood congregation. The covenants used in the church 
at Middelburg in 1591, and also in the congregation at 
London in 1592 or 1593, during Johnson’s pastorates, 
have fortunately been preserved. 

Some account of how Johnson came to employ a cov- 
enant in his church in Middelburg may be of interest 
here. Since 1589 or 1590, he had been pastor of “the 
church of English Merchants of the Staple”’ in that city. 
This was the church in which “Cartwright and Dudley 


1 Harleian MSS., 7042: p. 110. Cited in Doctor Dexter’s “ Congregationalism,”’ 
PP. 255, 256, note 2, 


49 


Fenner had successively ministered,” and therefore was 
not a Brownist congregation. In fact, Johnson had 
taken special pains to spy out the publications of the 
Separatists, and in 1591 he had the pleasure of seeing 
the whole edition of Barrowe and Greenwood’s “ Plaine 
Kefutation” burned at Dort. He kept a copy for him- 
self, however, that he might study their errors. The re- 
sult was that he read the whole book, and evidently 
changed his views in a short time to such an extent that 
he drew up the following “ Articles” (the term covenant 
is not used, but the document is in reality a covenant), 
the signing of which was withstood by Mr. Thomas 
Ferrers. Whether these articles were signed generally 
by the church is not known, but from the fact that John- 
son was in London in 1592, and pastor of a Separatist 
church there, it may be inferred that his plan did not 
entirely please the church in Middelburg, for those who 
would not sign, even if they had formerly been mem- 
bers of the church, might be considered so no longer. 
These articles of Francis Johnson probably furnish us 
with the earliest known English church-covenant docu- 
ment, containing genuine Brownist-Separatist views, as 
our information of earlier covenants may be fragmen- 
tary, and is drawn either from books or from manu- 
scripts concerning Brownist court proceedings. The 
text of the document in hand reads as follows : | 


Francis Johnson his articles,’ w* he vrged to be vnder 
| written by the Englishe Marchants in Middlebor- 
oughe | in October. 1591. withstoode by me Thomas 
Ferrers, | then Deputie of the Companie there. 


1 The original MS, may be found in the MS. Department of the British Museum 
See Additional MSS. Press mark, 28, Sar Po 22%, 
D 


50 


Wee whose names are vnderwritten, doe beleeve and 
acknowledge the truthe of the Doctrine and faythe of our 
Lorde Jesus Christe, w™ is revealed vnto vs in the Canon 
of the Scriptures of the olde and newe Testament. 

Wee doe acknowledge, that God in his ordinarie 
meanes for the bringinge vs vnto and keepinge of vs in 
this faythe of Christe, And an holie Obedience thereof, 
hath sett in his Churche teachinge and rulinge 4/ders, 
Deacons, and Helpers: And that this his Ordinance is to 
continue vnto the ende of the worlde as well vnder C/rzs- 
tian princes, as vnder heathen Magistrates. 

Wee doe willinglie ioyne together to live as the Churche 
of Christe, watchinge one over another, and submittinge 
our selves vnto them, to whom the Lorde /esus commit- 
teth the oversight of his Churche, guidinge and censur- 
inge vs according to the rule of the worde of God. 

To this ende wee doe promisse henceforthe to keepe 
what soever Christe our Lorde hath commanded ys, as 
it shall please him by his holie spiritt out of his worde to 
give knowledge thereof and abilitie there vnto. 


His opinions and exposicins vpon these 
fower Articles, as afore. 


That for anie w™ haue bene of this Churche and will 
not vnder-write these w™ promisse (as God shall inhable 
them) to stande to the forme and everie poynte of them, 
againste men and Angells vnto the deathe ; otherwise he 
may not be receaved as a member in this Churche. 

And allso that any man once havinge adioyned him 
selfe to this Ezglishe churche in Middleboroughe, he can- 
not fynde any warrant by the worde of God, that after the 
same partie is to adioyne him selfe to anye other Churche, 
either in Exglande or els where ; but there, as the Dis- 
cipline is rightlie established, as in this Churche. 


Evidently within a year after this covenant document 
was drawn up, Johnson went over to London, conferred 


with Barrowe in the Fleet prison, and in the fall of 1592 
was made pastor of the London congregation, while John 
Greenwood was elected teacher, Concerning the cove- 
nant that now began to be used in this church, Daniel 
Buck, scrivener, March 9, 1593, gave most valuable 
testimony : 


Being asked what vowe or promise hee made when hee came 
first to y" Societie, hee aunswereth & sayth y'he made y® Protesta- 
tion, viz: 

‘“‘That hee wold walke with y® rest of y™ so longe as they did 
walke in y* way of y® Lorde, & as farr as might bee warranted by 
y° word of God.’’ } 


Another of these earliest English church covenants, 
of which we have any account, is that of the Gains- 
borough-Scrooby-Leyden-Plymouth church of 1602, re- 
ferred to in Cotton Mather’s Magnalia,? and probably 
given in substance and expression in Bradford 6, and 
partially, at least, in Edward Winslow’s ‘““ Hypocrisie 
Unmasked.” * This church had its beginning at Gains- 
borough. It is thought to have remained intact from 
1602 till 1605 or 1606, when some of the members re- 
moved to Scrooby, where John Robinson became their 
pastor. In 1607 or 1608 this section of the church 
went to Amsterdam, and in 1609 to Leyden. The other 
part of the church in 1607, with the pastor, John 
Smyth, later founder of the English General Baptists, 
crossed to Amsterdam. 

Prof. Edward Arber, F. s. A., in his “Story of the 


1 Harleian MSS., 7042, p. 399. Cited by H. M. Dexter, p. p., in “The True Story 
of John Smyth.’”’ Boston, 1881, p. 69. 


2 Ed, 1702, Bk. I., p. 5. 


3 Pp. 97, 98. See Doctor Dexter’s “ Congregationalism,”’ p. 404. 


SZ 


Pilgrim Fathers,’ has suggested some new points in re- 
gard to the churches at Gainsborough and Scrooby that 
are important for us, as they bear indirectly upon the 
covenants used in these churches. 

Speaking of the peasants of the Pilgrim District he says : 


Herein, however, they were more fortunate in their intellectual 
development than Shakespeare. They had educated leaders. . 
He had none. 

Clyfton, Brewster, Robinson, and Smyth were all Cambridge 
University men ; and but for them there never would have been 
any Pilgrim Fathers at all. So going back to the ultimate facts, 
we say that the Pilgrim movement originated in the rectory and 
church of Babworth in Nottinghamshire ; and that it was mainly 
a Nottinghamshire movement." 

To this rectory, then, some forty-five months before Governor 
Bradford was born, came this Derbyshire man, the Rev. Richard 
Clyfton, @7. 33. He was what was then called a ‘‘ forward [ad- 
vanced | preacher, or a reformist.’’ ” 


The same author makes the following valuable state- 
ments concerning John Smyth and John Robinson : 


We have adduced, at pp. 133, 134, irrefutable evidence that, 
on the 22d March, 1605, the Rev. John Smyth was still a con- 
formist minister, and preacher of the city of Lincoln. So that, 
at that date, he had not even come to Gainsborough, where, after 
nine months of doubting, he finally adopted the principles of the 
Separation. The formation of the Gainsborough Church cannot 
therefore be earlier than 1606.* 

We are not aware of any evidence tending to prove in the 
slightest degree, that Robinson was ever a member of Smyth’s 
church; and we have proved, at pp. 133, 134 that the Gains- 
borough Church was not established till 1606. Therefore if 
Robinson went north in 1604, he must have gone to Scrooby.”’ * 


1“ The Story of the Pilgrim Fathers, 1606-1623 A. D.; as told by Themselves, 
their Friends, and their Enemies.’”’ London, Boston, and New York, 1897, p. 51: 


2 Ibid., p. 52. 3 [btd., p. 48. 4 [bid., p. 49. 


53 


Concerning Clyfton, Professor Arber says : 

“So that, although Clyfton deserted the Pilgrim church 
in 1609, he must ever be regarded as the senior of the 
leaders of that Separation.” 

The same author has the following statement concern- 
ing the Separatist movement :? 


The Separatist movement continued to grow; but, as Governor 
Bradford tells us at page 70, the church at Scrooby was not form- 
ally organized till 1606, when the late rector of Babworth [Clyfton] 
became its pastor, and the Rev. JOHN ROBINSON became his as- 
sistant, with probably one or more deacons. 


Thus it will be seen that these churches at Scrooby 
and Gainsborough were formed somewhat later than 
commonly has been supposed. The questions at once 
arise, whether these churches were organized separately 
and by the use of different covenants, and when ; also 
whether Smyth and Robinson were among those who 
originally covenanted together; and finally, who sug- 
gested the use of a church covenant to these humble 
country people ? 

Perhaps it may be impossible ever to answer these 
questions with very great certainty, but the Bradford 
manuscript * undoubtedly suggests that the people who 
formed these two churches at Gainsborough and Scrooby 
first covenanted together ‘(as the Lord’s free people”’ 
in one body, and later became “two distinct bodies or 
churches.” They would thus probably use the same 
covenant when finally organized, and if Cotton Mather 


1«The Story of the Pilgrim Fathers, 1606-1623 a. p.; as told by Themselves, 
their Friends, and their Enemies.’’ I.ondon, Boston, and New York, 1897, p. 52. 


2 [bid., p. 54 : 
8 As given by Professor Arber in ‘‘ The Story of the Pilgrim Fathers,’’ pp. 134, 135. 


54 


is right, the first covenanting took place in 1602. Where 
this occurred we do not know, but whenever and where- 
ever it took place may it not be the case that Cotton 
Mather has assigned too early a date for the final organ- 
ization of the church, and that this really occurred in 
1606 after John Smyth’s arrival, and that before this 
date there was no church at all at Gainsborough or at 
best a very informal one? 

In 1620 the majority of Robinson’s church, under the 
spiritual guidance of Brewster, embarked for England 
in the “Speedwell,” and thence, with some others, in 
the “Mayflower” for America, where they formed Ply- 
mouth colony and the so-called Mayflower Church, in 
which they seem to have employed the covenant origin- 
ally made in Gainsborough. 

Cotton Mather, in the reference above mentioned, 
says concerning the origin of the church : 


A Number of devout and serious Christians in the English 
Nation, finding the Reformation of the Church in that Nation, 
according to the WorD oF Gop, and the Design of many among 
the First Reformers, to labour under a sort of hopeless Retarda- 
tion, they did, Anno 1602, in the North of England, enter into a 
COVENANT, wherein expressing themselves desirous, not only to 
attend the Worship of our Lord Jesus Christ, with a freedom from 
humane Inventions and Additions, but also to enjoy all the Evan- 
gelical Institutions of that Worship, they did like those Macedo- 
nians, that are therefore by the Apostle Paul commended, give 
themselves up, first unto God, and then to one another. 


The text of the covenant itself is contained in the 
following passage from Bradford :? 


1“ Bradford’s History ‘Of Plimoth Plantation.’ From the Original Manuscript.” 
Boston, 1808, p. 13. 


55 


6] So many therefore of these proffessors as saw y°® 
evill of these things, in thes parts and whose harts y° 
Lord had touched w™ heavenly zeale for his trueth, they 
shooke of this yoake of antichristian bondage, and as y° 
Lords free people, joyned them selves (by a covenant of 
the Lord) into a church estate, in y® fellowship of y° gos- 
pell, to walke in all his wayes, made known, or to be 
made known unto them, according to their best en- 
deavours, whatsoever it should cost them, the Lord 
assisting them. 


Edward Winslow’s recollection in 1646 of John 
Robinson’s last word concerning this covenant, in his 
farewell address to the Pilgrim Fathers, is that ‘‘ Here 
also he put us in mind of our Church-Covenant (at 
least that part of it) whereby wee promise and cove- 
nant with God and one with another, to receive what- 
soever light or truth shall be made known to us from 
his written Word.” ! 

These, then, are the earliest known English church 
covenants that we can declare to be genuine. Doubt- 
less others, also, were drawn up, of which we have no 
knowledge. It might, however, be well to say here that 
in the so-called ‘‘ Crowle Records,”’ which Doctor Dexter 
has shown to be a forgery, there is given the text of a 
church covenant which is claimed to be that of a Bap- 
tist church, made in 1599. The whole subject is per- 
plexing, but it is not impossible that this may be a genu- 
ine covenant approximately of the date indicated, which 
has thus been incorporated in a mass of forged records. 
The text? of the covenant is as follows : 


1 Cited in Doctor Dexter’s ‘‘ Congregationalism,”’ p. 404. 


2 Cited in Doctor Dexter’s “ John Smyth.’ Boston, 1881, p. 64. 


56 


THE Firsr CuurcH CovENANT— 
4 JANUARY, 1599 


Wee, this Church of Christ (meeting at Epworth, 
Crowle and West Butterwick, in y® County of Lincoln) 
whose names are underwritten, give up ourselues to y® 
Lord, and one to another, according to y°® will of God, 
and do promise and covenant in y® presence of Christ, 
to walke together in y* lawes and ordinances of baptized 
belieuers, according to y® rules of y* gospel, and through 
Jesus Christ, He helping us. 


It is interesting to note that Doctor Dexter, the keen- 
est critic of the alleged “Crowle Records,’ declares ! 
concerning this covenant : 


I make no objection to that [the covenant] as being an instru- 
ment probable for such use at that time ; but I must question the 
plausibility of a small portion of its phraseology. The clause 
‘‘whose names are underwritten,’’ has no counterpart in any au- 
thentic early document of the sort which I have ever seen, and 
appears to have a somewhat later flavor. The act of covenanting 
in those days evidently emphasized itself as a deed of public 
engagement and avowal, rather than of more private mutual 
written contract. 


Yet we know that the covenants of the Scotch were 


’ and further, the covenant 


subscribed or “ underwritten,’ 
of Francis Johnson’s church in Middelburg, of the date 
1591, was ‘to be vnderwritten,’’ and he had announced 


also, that “anie w™ haue bene of this Churche and will 


not vnderwrite these w™ promisse . . . to stande to the 
forme and everie poynte of them, . . otherwise he may 
not be receaved as a member in this Churche.”” There- 


fore this Crowle covenanty-though contained in a forged 


— 


1“ John Smyth,” p. 69. 


MPa 


record, would seem to approve itself even by Doctor 
Dexter’s judgment as an entirely ‘‘ probable instrument’”’ 
of the time. The use of the words “The first Church 
Covenant,” rather than the document itself, may some- 
what be questioned, for the expression ‘ Church Cove- 
nant” was not much employed till at least thirty-five 
or forty years later, and the word “ First’’ implies that 
the writer either desired to have the reader accept this 
as the first church covenant ever drawn up, or knew of 
other later covenants used by the same church, and in 
the latter case it might indicate that the record was writ- 
ten considerably later than the date mentioned. A final 
judgment is difficult, but it is possible that this covenant 
is a genuine document of the time indicated, with other 
than the original names subscribed. 


58 


CHYyCE tik by 


THE GENERAL ACCEPTANCE OF BROWNE'S CHURCH 
COVENANT: (IDEA BY THE ~ EARBY 
INDEPENDENT LEADERS 


OBERT BROWNE'S church covenant idea seems 
R generally, if not always, to have been accepted 
by the earliest Independent churches. In fact, without 
some such basal idea it would have been almost impos- 
sible to form a strictly Separatist church. Yet the word 
“covenant’’ does not appear to have been used by all 
the earliest Independent leaders. For the word ‘ cov- 
enant”’ such expressions as “articles”? to be signed, 
“a promise,” “fan :agreement,’ etc., were sometimes 
substituted. Oftentimes also the covenant idea seems 
to be implied. by the use of such phraseology as 
“joyned by their willing consent.” 

The degree in which the earliest Independent leaders 
accepted the church covenant idea may be estimated 
somewhat from the following quotations. 

Barrowe and Greenwood, who were working for a 
Congregational polity between Brownism and Presby- 
terianism, in a paper sent to Cartwright about 1589, 
define the true church as 


A companie of Faithful people : separated from the vnbeleuers 
and heathen of the land : gathered in the name of CHRIST, whome 
they truelie worship, and redily obey as thier only King Priest 


59 


and Prophet [notice that these last words occur often in the text 
of later covenants, especially in America]: ioyned together as 
members of one bodie.’’ ! 


In this quotation the word ‘“covenant’’ is not used, 
and in Barrowe’s chief treatise, entitled a ‘ Brief Dis- 
couerie of the False Church,” of the date 1590, the word 
“covenant” is evidently not employed.’ 

The following citation® from the Confession of Faith 
of the exiled English church in Amsterdam, originally 
drawn up in 1596, clearly indicates that the covenant 
idea was employed by the Separatists in Amsterdam : 


And being come forth of this antichristian estate vnto the free- 
dom and true profession of Christ, besides the instructing and 
well guyding of their owne families, they are willingly to ioyne 
together in christian communion and orderly covenant, and by free 
confession of the faith and obediéce of Christ to vnite them- 
selves into peculiar and visible congregations : wherin, as members 
of one body wherof Christ is the only head, they are to worship 
and serve God according to his word, remembering to keep holy 
the Lords day. 


After the accession of James I. to the throne a pe- 
tition was sent to him, in which the differences between 
the Separatists and the Church of England were set 
forth. The word “covenant” does not occur in this, 
but may be implied in the following: 


That every true visible church, is a company of people called 
and separated from the world by the word of God, and joyned 


1 Cited in Doctor Dexter’s “Congregationalism,” pp. 222-223. 

2 Doctor Dexter’s “ Congregationalism,” p. 237. 

8 Article 33 of the Confession, as printed in a work entitled ‘‘Certayne Letters | 
trans | lated into English | being first written | in Latine. . . Together with the Con- 


fession of faith prefixed: where vpon | the said letters were first written. | Printed in 
the yeare, 1602.” 


60 


together by voluntarie profession of the faith of Christ, in the 
fellowship of the Gospell. } 


In a letter of Hugh Bromhead,’? one of John Smyth’s 
faithful followers, written about 1608, before Smyth’s 
separation, to William Hamerton of London, is the fol- 
lowing direct statement concerning the general use of 
the church covenant in the English churches of Holland : 

“Thirdly, we seek the fellowship of His faithful and 
obedient servants, and together with them to enter 
covenant with the Lord,” etc. 

In 1610 John Robinson published his ‘ Ivstification 
of Separation from the Church of England.’ In this 
he says®*: 


A company consisting though but of two or three separated 
from the world whether vnchristian, or antichristian, and gathered 
into the name of Christ by a covenant made to walk in all the 
wayes of God knowen vnto them, is a church, and so hath the 
whole power of Christ.4 


In a work by Henry Jacob, however, printed at 
Leyden in 1610; and entitled “The | Divine Beginning 
| and Institution of Christ’s true | Visible or Ministerial 
Church,” occurs the following definition of a Chris- 
tian church,® in which we might naturally expect that 
the word ‘“‘covenant”’ would appear; but it does not, as 
will be seen: 


A true Visible & Ministeriall Church of Christ is a nomber of 
faithfull people joyned by their willing consent in a spirituall out- 


1 From section cited in Doctor Dexter’s “ Congregationalism,”’ p. 307. 

2 In J. Hunter’s ‘‘ Founders of New-Plymouth,”’ London, 1854. Appendix N,.p. 167. 
2 Pere r: = 

4 Cited in Doctor Dexter’s “‘ Congregationalism,”’ p. 393. 


5 P. 2, 


61 


ward society or body politike, ordinarily coming togeather into one 
place, instituted by Christ in his New Testament, & having the 
power to exercise Ecclesiastical government and all Gods other 
spirituall ordinances (the meanes of salvation) in & for it selfe 
immediately from Christ. 


The absence of the word “covenant” in this passage 
is a little surprising, for Henry Jacob is supposed to have 
adopted John Robinson’s views in the same year in which 
this was printed. Furthermore, we know that Mr. Jacob 
employed a covenant in organizing his church in London 
in 1616, 

In a letter’ signed by John Robinson and William 
Drewstes, dated ‘Leyden,’ December 15, 1617,-to Sir 
Edwin Sandys, in reply to a letter of his dated London, 
November 12, 1617, occurs the following direct refer- 
ence to the covenant : 


4. We are knit together as a body in a more strict and sacred 
bond and covenant of the Lord, of the violation whereof we make 
great] conscience ; and by virtue whereof we do hold ourselves 
straightly tied to all care of each other's good, and of the whole 
by every, and so mutual. 


1 See Nathaniel Morton’s ‘‘ New Englands Memorial,’’ 1669. Reprinted at Boston, 
1855, pp. 267-269. 


62 


CHAP LER Vi 


THE CHURCH COVENANT IDEA IN DISFAVOR 


E have already noticed that Robert Browne 
adopted the Anabaptist principle that a Chris- 


tian church is formed of members in personal covenant 
union with God and with one another. We have now 
to note, however, that he refused to accept in full one, 
and rejected utterly another, requisite in joining any 
Anabaptist congregation, namely, profession of faith and 
baptism in connection therewith. Browne believed a 
church should be composed solely of believers and their 
children, and that a new baptism was unnecessary. In 
those early days men were seeking to discover the apos- 
tolic way of organizing churches, and it is no wonder, 
therefore, that soon after the publication of Browne’s 
“A Book Which Sheweth,” the question arose as to 
whether a church covenant was employed in the New 
Testament churches. This naturally led to adverse 
criticism of the church covenant idea. 

Stephen Bredwell, in his book entitled “ The Rasing 
of the Foundations | of Brownisme,”’ printed at London in 
1588, was one of the earliest publicly to antagonize the 
views of Robert Browne. Therefore what he says con- 
cerning the true method of forming a church, and con- 
cerning Browne’s method, it is important for us to know. 
The following citations clearly give his ideas : 


63 


A Church which consisteth of beleeuing people, builded so 
by fayth, vppon Iesus Christ the heade corner stone is in a two 
folde condition to be considered : the first is the verie knitting 
vnto Christ, wherein alone standeth the life and beeing of a 
Church, and in nothing else.! 

And like as euerie one particularly is iustifyed for a Christian, 
through their onely vniting with Christ by fayth, euen so are 
manie together iustified for a Church of Christ, through such 
vnion with him onely. And then, if this vnion giue it the forme 
of a Church, it muste necessarilie bee a Church, before it practise 
discipline, because our discipline in question hath no place, but 
in an vnited bodie, or congregation. ? 

The other thing that I would haue the reader perfect in is this: 
that this Zroublechurch Browne, not receyuing the loue of the 
trueth, touching the being of a Church in Christ by faith, but 
striuing for other groundes and essentiall causes thereof, which 
the Lorde neuer acknowledged, is (in a heauie, though iust iudge- 
ment), compassed about with a strong delusion, so as hee hath 
not abstained from defiling the verie couenant of life, to his owne, 
and all that follow after him, most certaine destruction, if the 
balme of Gods grace bee not sent in time to heale them. For in 
the forepart of his answere to maister Cartwright, he miserablie 
confoundeth the couenant of the lawe with the couenant of the 
Gospel. Whereof the first hath the condition of workes a part : 
the other is made simplie without condition of workes, if we 
belieue only. He abuseth to his purpose a number of places, 
all which proue that the establishment of the couenat of grace 
hath necessarily good works ioyned withall, as effects or fruits, 
but not as causes, and so any part of the couenant, as he grossely 
supposeth. ® 

The matter of a church wee haue. Let us nowe see what may 
be the fourme. . . For as it is likewise agreeable to all reason, 
that the vniting and knitting together of Christ and Christians, 
bee graunted the formall cause of a Church. Nowe this vnition 
is by two meanes, the one eternall, the other seruing but for this 
life. tthe téporal vnition, which (as I sayd) serueth for this 
life, is by faith : which shall cease in the day of the reuelation of 


1P. 73. 2'P. 74. S'Phs tre 4003k 


64 


the Saincts of God. . . Meane time, faith is as the engrafting of 
the braunches into the stock.? 

Here we meete with that foolishe and vayne exception of 
Browne agaynst Ma. C.[artwright] namely, Zhat Christ ts the life 
and essence of the Church, and not fatth, which is, as though 
faith had not direct relation to Christ, and Christ to faith in this 
consideration of a Church, wherein neyther can fayth bee con- 
sidered without Christ, nor yet Christ as theyr head without faith.” 


Evidently there were those who had felt the truth of 
what Bredwell and others of like opinion had said in 
criticism of Browne’s views on church polity, and thereby 
had been led to look into the matter of apostolic church 
government more thoroughly, or what more probably is 
the case, had come into such close touch with Dutch 
Anabaptist views, that they felt it their duty to alter 
their church practice. Thus, in 1608 or 1609, John 
Smyth, one of the most talented Independent leaders, 
reorganized his church, then in Amsterdam, and on pro- 
fession of faith baptized himself and those in agreement 
with him. Shortly after, Smyth and his associates, Hel- 
wys and Murton, came into conflict, chiefly on the ques- 
tion of succession? in the ministry, and Smyth and his 


1 Pp. 80, 81. 2.P. 83. 


3 In regard to the question, as to why John Smyth was driven out from his own 
church, there seems to have been some diversity of opinion among Baptist writers. 
Dr. B. Evans, even, was apparently in doubt on this point, for he says in “ The Early 
English Baptists’’ (Vol. I., p. 208) : 

‘It is admitted, on all hands, that from some cause or other, the church over which 
Smith and Helwys presided was divided, but the cause of division is not so manifest. 
Smith with some twenty-four persons, was excluded from the church.” 

Yet on pages 209, 210, Doctor Evans quotés a letter from ‘‘ Thomas Helwys, 
William Piggott, Thos. Seamer, John Morton” to the Waterland church, to which 
Smyth’s party had applied for membership, which answers this question as clearly as 
could be desired. The letter says: 

““We are... stirred up to write to you, praying you, . . that you will take wise 
counsel, . . how you deal in this cawse betwixt us and those who are justly, for their 
sins, cast out from us. And the whole cause in question being Succession (for so it is 
in deed and in truth). 

“And now for the other question that elders must ordain elders ; or if this be a 


65 


sympathizers were cast out of the church. He then 
sought fellowship with the Waterlanders, a branch of the 
Mennonites, but for reasons presumably deemed suffi- 
cient they declined to receive him. 

In 1612 Smyth died, doubtless still being pastor of 
the little excommunicated group. Probably in the year 
of his death Helwys and Murton founded in London 
the first general, or Arminian, Baptist church on English 
soil, “and thus” “the Baptist fellowship of England and 
America traces its direct sources back to the same foun- 
tain at Gainsborough from which Plymouth Congrega- 
tionalism flowed forth.”! In the next few years, also, 
other general Baptist churches were founded at “Lin- 


true perpetual rule; then from whom is your eldership come? And if one church 
might once ordain, then why not all churches always?”’ 

No answer to the question in hand could be clearer than this, especially as inter- 
preted by Thomas Helwys’ book, entitled “An Ad- | vertisement or admonition, | 
unto the Congregations, which | men call the New Fryelers, in the lowe | Countries. 
wrirten in Dutche. | And Publiched in Englis.”” This work was printed in 1611, and 
treats to considerable length the points of difference between the main church and the 
Smyth party. 

But our fullest information concerning the cause of this unfortunate affair proba- 
bly is given us in John Smyth’s own words, in “The Last Booke of John Smyth, 
called the Retractation of His Errors and the Confirmation of the Truth,’’ published 
by his followers after the close of his stormy career. He says: 

“I hold that succession is abolished by the Church of Rome, and that there is no 
true ministry derived from the apostles through the Church of Rome to England, but 
that the succession is interrupted and broken off. Succession being so broken off, it 
may, by two or three gathered together in the name of Christ, be renewed and as- 
sumed again, and herein there is no difference between Master Helwys and me: but 
Master Helwys saith that although there be churches already established, ministers 
ordained, and sacraments administered orderly, yet these are not bound to join to 
those former churches established ; but may, being as yet unbaptized, baptize them- 
selves as we did, and proceed to build churches of themselves, disorderly as I take it. 
Herein 1 differ from Master Helwys, and therefore he saith I have sinned against the 
Holy Ghost. . . It is not lawful for every one that seeth the truth to baptize, for then 
there might be as many churches as couples in the world, and none have anything to 
do with the other, which breaketh the bond of love and brotherhood in churches; but 
in these outward matters I dare not any more contend with any man, but desire that 
we may follow the truth of repentance, faith, and regeneration, and lay aside dissen- 
sion for mint, cummin, anniseed.””— Dy. John Waddington’ s “ Congreg. History,’’ 
1567-1700. London. 1874. Pp. 189 plus. 


1In “ A History of the Congregational Churches,” by Prof. Williston Walker, Pp. 
59: New York. 1804. 


E 


66 


coln, Sarum, Coventry, and Tiverton.” * As to whether 
there had not been in England during the sixteenth cen- 
tury English Anabaptist churches, or churches which 
had maintained the idea of baptism on profession. of 
faith, it can only be said that there may have been, 
probably were such, but concerning them we know little 
or nothing. English Baptist churches, at any rate, as 
we know them are not Anabaptist churches, but rather 
an outgrowth of Independency.’ 

The question now arises, Was a covenant used in the 
organization of these earliest Baptist churches composed 
of English people? This is a question most difficult 
satisfactorily to answer. 

It would certainly seem probable that those who had 
come directly from Independent churches should have 
employed in general the same method in forming their 
own new churches. Or, on the other hand, was their 
revulsion toward the falsity of their former views so 
great that they impulsively gave up the old and made, 
so to say, an entirely new church polity? 

For an answer we must turn to the writings of the 
new Baptist leaders and those with whom they came in 
contact. 

John Smyth has often been severely criticised for 
changing his views so often, as if that indicated a weak- 


1 Ina letter dated November 18, 1626, evidently from the church of Murton and 
Denys, to ‘‘ Hans de Ries and Renier Wypbrant,”” printed in Dr. B. Evans’ work enti- 
tled, ‘“‘ The Early English Baptists,” Vol. LES peee. 


2 In Robert Baillie’s “ Anabaptism, | the True Fountaine | 
Independency, Antinomy, 
of | Browntsme, ' Famtlisme.” 
occurs the following, which bears on this point: ‘The soberest Anabaptists do em- 
brace the whole way of the rigid separation. The Brownists did borrow all their Tenets 
from the Anabaptists of old, it is but equall that the Anabaptists this day should seek 
back again their Fathers debt from the Brownists.”” 


, London, 1646, 


67 


ness of mind. But in reality it certainly appears that 
no one ever carried out the fundamental principles of 
Congregationalism with greater precision and consistency 
than this same John Smyth. He was a Congregation- 
alist of the true type. He had covenanted with his 
church in 1606 “to walke in all his wayes, made known, 
or to be made known unto them, according to their best 
endeavours, whatsoever it should cost them, the Lord 
assisting them,”’ and it is, therefore, not surprising to us 
to find that in 1608, about the time he accepted Baptist 
views, he should declare in the introductory note to his 
book entitled, “The Differences of the | Churches of 
the seperation : | Contayning, | A Description of the 
Leitovrgie | and | Ministerie of the visible Church: | 

Annexed: | As a Correction and Svpplement to a little | 

treatise lately published, bearing title: | Principles and 
Inferences, concerning the visible Church” : 

“Wee will never be satisfied in endevoring to reduce 
the worship and ministery of the Church, to the primi- 
tive Apostolique institution from which as yet it is so 
farr distant.” 

This sentence contains the true ambition of John 
Smyth, and gives in a few words the goal toward which 
Baptists ever have striven, for though nominally he may 
nave been a Brownist when he wrote these words, yet 
from them it may be seen that he was striving for some- 
thing better than Brownism. Yet in this same intro- 
ductory note Smyth states that he believed that already 
the Separatists had brought back apostolic practices into 
their churches in three chief respects. He says : 


The absolute necesssitie of the true constitution appeareth, be- 
cause if the Church be truly constituted and framed, ther is a 


68 


‘true Church : the true spowse of Christ : if the Church be falsely 
constituted, ther is a false Church: & she is not the true spowse 
of Christ: Herein therfor especially are those auncient breth- 
ren to be honoured, that they have reduced the Church to the 
true Primitive & Apostolique constitution which consisteth in 
these three things. 1. The true matter which are sayntes only. 
2. The true forme which is the vniting of them together in the 
covenant. 3. The true propertie which is communion in all holy 
things, & the power of the L. Jesus Christ, for the maintayning of 
that communion. 


At this time, then, John Smyth believed that the 
Separatist churches had already been “ reduced”’ to the 
“true forme which is the vniting of them together in the 
covenant.” Did he change his mind concerning this 
later? Apparently within a comparatively short time, 
for in a book entitled “The Character of the Beast : | 
or | the false Constitution of the Church. | Discov- 
ered |” printed in 1609, he says : 


So the anabaptists (as you cal them) doe not set vp a new 
covenant & Gospel, though they set vp a new or rather the old 
Apostolique baptisme which Antichrist had overthrowne : & 
whereas you say they have no warrant to baptisme themselves, I 
say, asmuch as you have to set vp a true Church, yea fully asmuch : 
For if a true Church may be erected which is the most noble ordi- 
nance of the New Testament, then much more baptisme, for bap- 
tisme is the visible forme of the Church [not the church covenant 
as he himself while a Brownist had insisted], as Disciples are the 
matter: . . or if they must recover them [all Christ's visible ordi- 
nances], men must beginne so to doe, & then two men joyning 
together may make a Church (as you say): Why may they not 
baptize seing they cannot conjoyne into Christ but by baptisme, 

. . but it is evident that Christ's Commandements must bee 
obeyeed, Ergo, this commandement of having & vsing the com- 
munion of the Church, Ministery, VVorship & Gouernment those 
Holy meanes of Salvation which the Lord of his mercy hath given 


69 


vs with his covenant, & commaunded vs to use: & therefore if 
all the commafdements of God must bee obeyed, then this of 
baptisme, & this warrant is sufficient for assuming baptisme : Now 
for baptizing a mans self ther is as good warrant, as for a man 
Churching himself: For two men singly are no Church, joyntly 
they are a Church, & they both of them put a Church vppon 
themselves, so may two men put baptisme vppon themselves : 
For as both those persons vnchurched, yet have powre to assume 
the Church each of them for himself with others in communing. 
So each of them vnbaptized hath powre to assume baptisme for 
himself with others in communion. 


Here, certainly, Smyth does not say that he rejects 
entirely the church covenant idea, but now he seems to 
regard baptism as of more consequence than the church 
covenant, for he says that baptism is the “visible form” 
of the church, whereas he had written in the preceding 
year that the “true forme” of a church was the “ vnit- 
ing together . . . in the covenant.” Indeed, from 
this time the word “covenant” does not seem to have 
been much used by Smyth. In the confession, signed 
solely by himself, in defining the church of Christ, he 
says simply : | 

“The church of Christ is a company of the faithful : 
baptized after confession of sin and of faith, endowed with 
the power of Christ,” ! and, further, in “A | Declaration 
of Faith | of | English People | Remaining at Amsterdam 
in Holland,” printed in 1611, which seems to have agreed 
with Smyth’s views on this point, it is said? concerning 
the church and the entrance of members, merely : 


1 See Dr. B. Evans’ ‘‘ Early English Baptists,’’ Vol. I., p. 254. Appendix F. Ar- 
ticle 12. 


2 “Confessions of Faith, and other Public Documents, illustrative of the History of 
the Baptist Churches of England in the 17th Century.”” Hanserd Knollys Society. 
London, 1854, p. 6, 


7O 


10. That the church of Christ is a company of faith- 
ful people, separated from the world by the word and 
Spirit of God, being knit unto the Lord, and one unto 
another, by baptism, upon their own confession of the 
faith, and sins. 

13. That every church is to receive in all their mem- 
bers by baptism, upon confession of their faith and sins, 
wrought by the preaching of the gospel, according to 
the primitive institution and practice. And therefore 

churches constituted after any other manner, or of any 
other persons, are not according to Christ's testament. 


John Robinson also, in his work entitled “Of Re- 
ligious Communion | Private & Publique. | With the si- 
lenceing of the clamours raysed by M* Thomas Helvvisse 
agaynst our reteyning the Baptism receaved in [Eneh; 
& administering of Bapt: unto Infants. |. . Printed 
Anno 1614,” has given an interesting account of the or- 
ganization of Smyth’s Baptist church, in which he clearly 
states that this church was ‘gathered by baptism,” and 
that Smyth and his followers “came together to erect a 


”) 


new Ch: by baptism.” No mention is made of the use 
of acovenant. The passage reads’ 


Lastly, if the Ch: be gathered by baptism, then will M" Helw: 
his Ch: [John Smyth had died in 1612] appear to all men to 
be built vppon the sand, considering the bapt: it had, & hath : 
which was, as I have heard from themselves, on thismanner. M"' 
Smith, Mt Helw: & the rest haveing vtterly dissolved, & dis- 
claymed their former Ch : state & ministery, came together to erect 
a new Ch: by baptism: vnto which they also ascribed so great 
virtue, as that they would not so much as. pray together, before 
they had it. And after some streyning of courtesy, who should 
begin, . . M* Smith baptized, first himself, & next M' Helwis, & 
so the rest, making their particular confessions. 


1P. 48. 


a1 


This quotation lays great stress on baptism as the fun- 
damental factor in forming a new church. As Baptists 
we do the same to-day, yet most of our churches in 
America, at least in the North, make use of a church 
covenant, and that Smyth’s party still continued to use 
some informal covenant formula, is made probable by 
the fact that they were attacked not for failure to use a 
covenant, as they certainly might have been had they > 
failed in this respect, but for their heresy in making 
a new baptism fundamental in the organization of a 
church, and therefore of more importance than the 
church covenant. 

That Smyth’s party in reality did still maintain the use 
of their church covenant (though possibly the word 
“covenant” was no longer employed by them), even 
after they had been exiled from their own church, is 
rendered certain by a letter of Lubbert Gerritis, one of 
the principal Waterland ministers at Amsterdam to the 
church at Leeuwarden, concerning ‘the English persons 
of whom formerly they got intelligence, who long ago 
entreated by iterations to unite with our church.’ 

This letter states the custom of Smyth’s little com- 
pany in admitting members in the following detached 
clause: “and after this [-that] they have baptized him 
[a candidate for membership], receiving the promise 
from the christened one that he will bend himself under 
the whole Gospel, with the doctrine of it, it might be that 
they did understand it or did not yet understand it.” 
This last clause resembles much in thought the expres- 
sion, “‘made known unto them, or to be made known 


unto them,” in Smyth’s covenant made at Gainsborough 


1See Dr. B. Evans’ ‘‘ Early English Baptists.”’ Vol. I., pp. 211-213. 


72 


in 1606, and therefore it seems probable that he used 
throughout his short but checkered career, this same 
simple but expressive formula, though after 1609 he 
emphasized faith and baptism, not the church covenant, 
as fundamental in the organization of Christian churches. 
Thus even with him the church covenant had already 
begun to be of only secondary importance. 

The letter above mentioned also says: ‘Our [the 
Waterland] ministers have . . . most perfectly exam- 
ined them [those left of Smyth’s company] as regards 
the doctrine of salvation and the government of the 
church, and also inquired for the foundation and form of 
their baptism and we have not found that there was any 
difference at all, neither in the one nor the other thing, 
between them and us.” In other words, these Water- 
landers, a branch of the Mennonites, may also have used 
some informal covenant formula, though such an infer- 
ence may not necessarily be correct. The statement is 
merely that the Waterlanders had the same church gov- 
ernment as the church of which Smyth had been pastor, 
and his church certainly used an informal covenant 
formula, styled in this letter a ‘“ promise.” 

Now, did Helwys and Murton also follow John 
Smyth’s example and employ covenants in organizing 
the first Baptist churches in England? For answer we 
must appeal solely to the writings of Helwys and Mur- 
ton, for no early records of these churches seem to have 
been preserved. 

The first work which we may consult on this point 
was published by Thomas Helwys in 1611. It is en- 
titled “An Ad- | vertisement or admonition, | unto the 
Congregations, vvhich | men call the New Fryelers, in 


73 


the lowe | Countries wrirten in Dutche, | And Pub- 
liched in Englis.” In this Helwys says :! 


But these men [Smyth and those who had remained faithful to 
him, who had decided that after all, there ought to be some 
‘‘succession’’ in religious customs, when they had once been 
rightly established, so that not every two or three persons could 
come together and at their own pleasure form a church] had 
rather heare in your Church or congregation fyve words without 
anie vnderstanding, then Ten thousand with vnderstanding in a 
congregation or Church gathered together by the preaching of 
the gospell of Iesus Christ, and baptized into his name vpon the 
confession of their faith and sinnes. 

This they knew was our beginninge. 


In the same work he also says :” 


And so is this libertie hidden from their [of Smyth and his party] 
eies (you all that teach that doctrine being instruments there of) 
that they may joyne thé selves to gether in the covenant of the 
New Testament, & so be the church & Temple of God them 
selves as well as you or anie people: and through the gracious 
blessing of god, which he hath promissed shal be vpon them, 
they so doeing and walking in his waies, they may, and shall 
growe to be a most holy people. 


The next work of importance touching the point in 
hand is that by John Robinson, entitled “Of Religious 
Communion | Private & Publique. | With the silence- 
ing of the clamours raysed by M* Thomas | Helvvisse 
agaynst our reteyning the Baptism receaved in | Engl : 
& administering of Bapt: unto Infants. |. . Printed 
Anno 1614.” In this the following very clear statement 
from Helwys, concerning the covenant, is quoted :? 


“Helw. This ts the Covenant, (sayth the Lord) chat / 


1P. 40. = Pies, 3 P. 70. 


74 


‘will make with the house of Israel, I will put my law 
un theyr inward partes, & write it in theyr hearts, & I 
wilbe theyr God, & they shalbe my people ler: 31. 33. 
Hebr: 8:10. And our Saviour Christ declares this 
more fully, Mark 16. 16. where he sayth, Go yee into 
all the world, & preach the gospell: he that shall beleww 
& be baptized, shalbe saved. And here (sayth he) és the 
new Covenant set down both on Gods behalf, & theyrs with 
whom itis made. On Gods that he would write his law 
in mens hearts, by the power of his spirit in the preaching 
of the gospell, & wilbe theyr God, & save them: & on the 
peoples behalf, to beleiv the gospell, & to be baptized.” 


In 1615 also, Helwys, or Murton, which one is uncer- 
tain, printed a book of ‘““Opiections: | Answered by way 
of Dialo- | gue, wherein is proved | By the Law of God; 

| By the law of our Land: | And by his Mat* many 
testimonies | That no man ought to be persecuted | for 
his religion, as he testifie his alle- | geance by the Oath, 
appointed by Law.” In this work the author says :! 


So now every spirituall Israelite with whome the Lord is, & 
whose spirit the Lord stirreth vp are commaunded, to go and 
build, and the Lord wil prosper them in riseing vp and building, 
though some be more excellent in the busines then others, the 
begining of which spirituall building, is first to beget men a new 
by the immortal seed of Gods word, so makeing them liveing 
stones, & therevpon to couple them together a spirituall house 
vnto God. 1. Pet. 2. vpon the confession of their faith “by bap- 
tisme /as the scriptures of the new testament every where teach, 
as before is shewed. 


Later in the same work? the author says further : 


I affirme that the faithful] have right to this covenant of life 
and salvation onely upon their repentance and faith, and not 


1 P, 66. 2 Pp. 68, 69. 


75 


otherwise. . . God hath promised life and salvation by Christ to 
none that are vnder condemnation but onely by repentance and 
faith : let any shew the contrary if they be able. If any say as 
some foolishly have done, being vrged/’ that it is the covenat of 
the visible church : what covenant is that but the covenant of life 
and salvation made to the faithfull, Christs body and church. 


John Murton published one more work that we can- 
not afford to overlook. It was printed in 1620, and is 
entitled “A | Discriprion | or wHat Gop | hath Pre- 
destinated | Concerning | Man. | 

These are Murton’s mature views, and are therefore 
important. He says :' 


First I say and proue: neither circumcision nor baptisme, are 
seales of the couenat of life and saluation ; that which is now the 
seale of life and saluation was euer the same, which is the holy 
Spirit of promise. 


Later occurs the following passage :? 


Againe, (it is granted by the aduersary, and it is a truth, that) 
the Couenant in Ier 31. and other places, in the //ebrew sig- 
nifieth a compact or agreement, vpon a difference between two or 
more ; which in the new Testament, is turned into a word sig- 
nifying a will or Testament : So that this is agreed vpon on all 
sides, two parties must be in this Couenant, agreeing and prom- 
ising by mutuall accord for the thinges to be done. 


The author says further :* 


But first I will lay down a maine foundatid, which being suffi- 
ciently proued, the euident truth shall plainly appear : and this it 
is; That the members and Churches of C/rzst, are so made ; 
both by /azth and Baftisme, and not by the one only, which 
being true ; it will follow, that neither the Church & members of 


1P. 145. zP. B40. 3 Pp. 154-156. 


76 


Rome, are members and Church of Christ, because Faith is 
neither required nor performed thereto ; nor yet any profession of 
people, that seperate from Rome as from no Church of Chrisé, 
retayning Romes Baptisme, and building new Churches without 
Baptisme. . . And Christ promiseth his presence vnto two or 3. 
so gathered into his name : so that to be gathered into the name 
,of CuRIsT, by being made Disciples and baptised, is, to be made 
‘members of his body (which is his church) of his Flesh, and of 
his bone : plainely confirmed, wee are all by one Spirit, baptised 
into one body : as also, except a man be borne of water and the 
Spirit, hee cannot enter into the Kingdome of God. Zus Christ 
made Disciples, wee must be the sonnes of God by Faith, and 
put on Crist by Baptisme, . . and wee are made partakers of 
Christ, by hauing the beginnings, which beginnings are Repent- 
ance, Faith, and Baptisme, other beginnings, or foundation can 
no man lay. 


Somewhat later in the work Murton says :? 


The Eunuch was a member of Christ Jesus, by faith and bap- 
tisme, and by vertue of the same might remaine in any particular 
Church of Christ where hee would, for in communion all must 
liue; . . was euer Church of the new Testament made by a 
couenant without baptisme? there is not the least showe for it. 
In this they [John Robinson and his church] runne to Jsvaels re- 
newed couenant, wherein againe they acknowledge Rome and 
England true Churches in their foundation: and when they 
ioyned to them, they ioyned into Gods couenant : and hauing 
broken it, they renew it againe: this they cannot auoid. Now as 
these two, the one receiuing the other, became a Church as they 
say, if one of these had sinned, I would aske Ioh. Rob. if the 
other had not beene bound to cast him out, or to separate from 
him, which is all one. That was their owne grounds of old, and 
from Math. 18. but they haue turned their old profession vpside 
downe. vancis Johnson in one manner, and John Rob. in 
another, that a man cannot now’tell what are their grounds. 


a Na a a ee 


1 Pp. 169, 170, 


77. 


In a book entitled “A Defence | of the Doc | trine 
Propoun- | ded by the Synode at Dort: against Iohn 
Mvrton and | his Associates, in a | Treatise intutled ; 
A Description | what God, &c. | With | the Refutation 
of | their Answer to a Writing touching | Baptism. | 
By Iohn Robinson. | Printed in the year, 1624,” are 
the following passages, referring to Murton’s mature 
views concerning the formation of churches of Christ : 


Now followeth our main foundation, that as the infants of 
Abraham, and of the Israelites his posterity, were taken into the 
Church-covenant, or covenant of life and salvation, as they 
[Murton and his associates] call it (and rightly in a true sense) 
with thetr parents, and circumcised: so are the infants of the 
fatthfull now, and to recetv accordingly the seal of Baptism: to 
which they say, and proue (as they say) that netther Circumcet- 
ston was, nor Baptism ts a seal of the Covenant of salvation, but 
the spirit of promise which ts ever the same. 


Murton and his associates teach: 


That members, and Churches of Christ are made both by faith, 
and baptism, and not by the one only.? 

They oft say, but never proue, that Churches are gathered by 
baptism.' 


From the above quoted passages alone we are obliged 
to draw our conclusions as to the method used in form- 
ing the earliest Baptist churches in England. One point 
is clear, namely, that from 1611 at least Murton and 
Helwys emphasized repentance, faith, and especially 
baptism as the means of “gathering” or organizing a 
Christian church. It would also appear that even from 
1608 or 1609 they had held this view with Smyth, and 


PP. 164. 2 P. 180, 3'P, X93. 


78 


had formed their first church by baptism, though as we 
have seen, they probably made also covenant promises. 
But after Smyth and his followers had been driven out, 
Helwys and Murton evidently continued to modify their 
opinion till the idea of a church covenant became of no 
importance. 

From this time their churches were to be “gathered” 
by faith and baptism. With them baptism had come 
to take the place of a church covenant, for one now 
entered the church by baptism. However, in a sense 
the covenant idea was still maintained by them, but not 
the church covenant idea of Browne. Baptist churches 
were not to be outside the covenant promises because 
they did not use an explicit church covenant. Baptism 
is, as it were, the act of making an implicit covenant, or 
rather is the means of entering into the new covenant, 
which is not a church covenant, but is a “covenant of 
grace and salvation,” the covenant of the New Testa- 
ment, which always remains the same, has been made 
forever on God’s part, and the benefits of which may be 
had by any who believe the gospel and are baptized. 

It is therefore probable that even when Helwys and 
Murton founded the first Baptist church in England at 
London, no explicit church covenant was employed, and 
if not then, certainly not later, when other churches 
were formed at “Lincoln, Sarum, Coventry, and Tiver- 


”) 


ton.” It is unfortunate, however, that no early records 
of these churches appear to have been preserved. The 
present record book of the church at Tiverton begins in 
1678, the first one having been lost during the troublous 


times of the Civil War. 


79 


CHAPTER VII 


OTHER EARLY CHURCH COVENANTS IN ENGLAND AND 
AMERICA BEFORE 1640 


OVENANTS continued to be used by the follow- 
Ce ers of Robert Browne, and in 1616 Henry Jacob 
organized at London the first important Independent 
church on English soil. This church very likely came 
in time to embrace other gatherings, or congregations 
of Independents in the metropolis. It was formed in 
the following manner : * 


Standing together, they joined hands, and solemnly 
covenanted with each other, in the presence of Almighty 
God: To walk together in all Gods wayes and ordi- 
nances, according as he had already revealed, or should 
further make them known to them, 


“The Records of An Antient Congregation of Dissent- 
ers from w® many of y® Independant & Baptist churches 
in London took their first rise,” ? namely Jacob’s church, 
of which the earliest covenant has just been given, refer 


1 From Neal, “ Hist. Puritans, 
ter in “ John Smyth,” p. 69. 

The organization of Henry Jacob’s church by a covenant seems to have made 
his name prominent among Dissenters for among the Boswell Papers, preserved in the 
Manuscript Department of the British Museum, Vol. I., p. 146, is a letter which says, in 
speaking of English refugees who came to Holland: ‘ Some are Jacobites who require 
a New Covenant for members of a church to make before they can be communicants.”’ 


”” ed, 1837, Vol. I., p. 462. Cited by Dr. H. M. Dex- 


2 Preserved in the so-called Gould MS., now in possession of Principal Gould, Re- 
gent’s Park College, London. 


80 


to a renewal of the covenant in 1630, during the pastor- 
ate of Mr. Lathrop. The record reads: 


COVENANT RENEWED. 


Whilst M* Lathrop was an Elder here some being 
greived against one that had his Child then Baptized in 
y* Common Assemblies, & desireing & urging a Renoun- 
cing of them, as Comunion w them, M?... Can 
also then walking t Saints where he left Mr’ 
How (he going w™ Some to Holland) He desireing that 
y® Church w Mr’ Lathorp would renew their Covenant 
in Such a Way, and then he with Others would have 
Comunion w” them. M* Dupper would have them 
therein to Detest and Protest against y® Parish churches, 
Some ware Unwilling in their Covenanting either to be 
tyed either to protest against y* truth of them, or to 
affirm it of them, not knowing wt in time to come God 
might further manifest to them thereabout Yet for peace 
Sake all Yelded to renew their Covenant in these Words 

“To Walke togeather in all y° Ways of God So farr as 
he hath made known to Us, or shall make known to us, 
& to forsake all false Ways, & to this the several Mem- 
bers Subscribed their hands” 


A very interesting covenant document is preserved in 
the British Museum collection of Boswell Papers.? It 
consists of the “ Articles or Couenant offered by M"™ Hu: 
Peters Minister, to the English Congregation at Rtter- 
dam, to his Congreg™ : before admission into it or to the 
Lord’s supper to be subscribed &c : 1633.” 


The 15 Artickells and Couenant-of M’ Hugh Peter of Rott 


1| To | Be Contented wth meet triall for our Wittness 
to be members: . . 
2| To | Cleaue in hart-to the truth and pure worship 


1 Word or words omitted in the Gould copy. 
2«« Boswell Papers, Additional MS.,”’ 6394. Vol. I., p. 161. 


fe) 


rf 


12 


13 
14 


15 


To 
To 
To 
To 
To 
To 


To 


To 


To 
To 


SI 


of God and to oppose all wayes of Innoua- 
tion and Corruption. 

Suffer the word to be the guider of all Con- 
trouersies. 

Labor for growth of knowledge and to that 
end to Confer, pray, heare, and meditate: . . 
Submitte to brotherly admonision and Cen- 
sure wth out enuie or anger. . . 

Be throughly reconciled one to a nother euen 
in Indytment be fore wee begin this work. . 
Walk in all kind of exactness both in regard 
of our selues, and others. . . 

Forbear Clogging our selues and harts wth 
earthly Cares wch is the bayn of religion. 
Labor to gett A great measuer of humillitie 
and meeknes and to bannish pride and high- 
Hes of Spirit, 

Meditate the furthering of the gosspell at 
home and A broad as well in our perssons as 
wth our pursses, . . 

Take nearly to hart our bretherens Condition 
and to Conforme our selues to theyr troble 
same tymes both in dyet and apparrell that 
thay be wth out excesse in nessesitie. . . 
Deall wth all kynde of wissdome and gent- 
tellnes towards those that are wth out. . . 
Studie Amitie and brotherly loue. . . 

Put one and other in mynd of this Couenant 
and as occassion is offered to take an Acomte 
of what is done in the premisses. . 

And for the furthering of the Kingdome of 
C[h]rist : dilligently to instruckt Chilldren & 
seruants , yea and to look to our wayes and 
accomtes dayley: Finis! | 


1 A letter of “ Alex Browne” (‘* Boswell Papers, Additional MS.” 6394, Vol. I., p. 
153) sent with this covenant, dated November 1, 1633, says: ‘‘I have heir sent you Mr 
Peters Couenant wch he maide and vnless wee will all subscribe to this his Couenant 
wee shall not be admitted to the lords Table neither ould members nor none: ’so that 
it semes to me our Church formerly was noe Church: but what authoritie he haith to 


F 


82 


This document is of special interest, inasmuch as Mr. 
Peter was pastor of a Puritan church at Rotterdam, and 
was also one of the earliest members of the ‘ Massa- 
chusetts Company”’ in 1628. He is supposed to have 
been a friend of Endicott, and was one of those Puri- 
tans that must have known Rev. John White, who ap- 
parently somewhat favored Plymouth church views. 
Whether Mr. Peter accepted the covenant idea through 
the contact of Endicott and other friends with the 
Plymouth colonists is uncertain but possible, for appa- 
rently he did not use a covenant in his church till 1633. 
But he might also have accepted the idea from the In- 
dependent churches in Holland. Whether he adopted 
the Separatist polity from the one or the other, however, 


doe these thinges: I know not: for he him sellf saith the C[hJurch of Eingland doth 
tye the Concienc of men to do this and that, and he for his parte in this his Couenant 
ties both Concienc. and. . .’’ Judging from this quotation, Alexander Browne evi- 
dently had once been a member of Mr. Peter’s church, and with others had been con- 
siderably aggravated by this sudden assumption of authority on the part of the pastor. 
The blame is clearly laid on Mr. Peter and on no other. Certainly he could have made 
no covenant in this church before 1633, and probably no other pastors of this church 
had made any, for the authority by which he now imposes this covenant is not known. 

It is, therefore, difficult to agree with Prof. Williston Walker’s statements, that 
“Rey. Hugh Peter, . . employed a covenant in the church at Rotterdam of which he 
became colleague pastor on his flight from England in 1629,’’ and that “ probably 
Peter’s own adoption of the covenant was due to the influence of his associate in the 
Rotterdam charge, Dr. William Ames, whose Separatist leanings were decided.” 
(‘« Hist. of the Congreg. Churches,”’ p. 102.) 

Further, the correctness of the following statement (‘‘ Creeds and Platforms,”’ p. 96) 
may be questioned, that ‘‘ One [of the covenants preserved by William Rathband] is 
that adopted by the church in Rotterdam, Holland, when Peter became its pastor.” 
[From note, ‘In 1629.’’] ‘The covenant of 1633 seems to be the first used by him, and 
the covenant preserved by Rathband is probably a renewed and later covenant of the 
Rotterdam church, 7. e., of a date between 1633 and 1635. 

The ordination of Mr. Peter, in which this covenant was used, is described ina letter 
contained in the ‘‘ Boswell Papers, Additional MS.’’ 6394, Vol. I., p. 146, as follows : 

“Concerning Mr Peters ordination 

“©; There was a New Covenant made wch contains [word or words illegible] & strict 
obligaons to wch they should bind themselves. and he would be chosen by none but 
them that would put there hands to that papr. This saith Mr Paget was a kind of 
Excommunicaén to alow[?] two [?] pts[?] of the congrega6n in former times. & hath 
caused the difficulty of administering the sacrament because he will give it to none but 
them whose names are at his New Covenant. Those New Covenanted must choose to 
Call him, So before that a Sermon was made by Mr Forbes.” 


83 


it may safely be said that he was, at least, one of the 
earliest Englishmen to develop the church covenant into 
a written document with numbered, specific divisions. 
His influence on the drawing up of later covenants 
seems to have been considerable. 

Before Mr. Peter came to America in 1635 evidently 
he renewed or modified the covenant of 1633 to read 
as follows : 


THE COVENANT OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH 
AT ROTERDAME. ! 


WE whose names are here-under written, having a 
long time found by sad experience how uncomfortable 
it is to walk in a disordered and unsettled condition, &c. 
1. Doe renue our Covenant in Baptisme, and avouch 
God to be our God. 2. We resolve to cleave to the 
true and pure worship of God, Opposing to our power 
all false wayes. 3. We will not allow our selves jn any 
known sin, but will renounce it, so soon as it is mani- 
fested from Gods Word so to be: the Lord lending us 
power. 4. We resolve to carry our selves in our severall 
places of government and obedience with all good con- 
science, knewing we must give an account to God. 5. 
We will labour for further growth in grace, by hearing, 
reading, prayer, meditation, and all other wayes we can. 
6. We meane not to over-burthen our hearts with earthly 
cares, which are the bane of all holy duties, the breach 
of the Sabbath, and the other Commandments. 7. We 
will willingly and meekly submit to Christian Discipline, 
without murmuring, and shall labour so to continue, and 
will endevour to be more forward, zealous, faithfull, lov- 
ing and wise in admonishing others. 8. We will labour 


1 Text from “ A Briefe Narration of Some Church Courses,” etc., by William Rath- 
band. London, 1644. Pp. 17, 18. Rathband states concerning this covenant that it 
is “ The Covenant of the English Church at Roterdame (as ts reported to us) renewed 
when Mr H. P. was made their Pastour,’’ which we have seen cannot well be correct. 


84 


by all our abilities for the furtherance of the Gospell as 
occasion shall be offered to us. 9. We promise to have 
our children, servants, and all our charge taught the 
wayes of God. 10. We will strive to give no offence to 
our brethren by censuring them rashly by suspitions, evill 
speakings, or any other way. 11. Lastly, we doe protest 
not onely against open and scandalous sins, as drunken- 
nesse, swearing, &c., but also against evill companie, and 
all appearance of evill to the utmost of our power. . 


Per me H. FP. 


In 1633 the first Particular, or Calvinistic, Baptist 
Church in England was formed. Did this new church 
employ a covenant? In all probability, for a number, 
at least, of its members had peacefully been dismissed 
from one of the covenant churches, notably Mr. Jacob's. 
The only testimony to be had on this point is to be 
found in the well-known Gould manuscript, previously 
mentioned, containing among others the Jessey Records 
and the so-called Kiffin. Manuscript. 

What then, is the testimony of these two documents? 
The Jessey Records read :* 


There haveing been much discussing these denying Truth of y® 
Parish Churches, & y® Church being now become so large y* it 
might be prejudicial, these following desired dismission that they 
might become an Entire Church, & further y° Comunion of those 
Churches in Order amongst themselves, w™ at last was granted to 
them & performed Sept 12. 1633 etc. 


To These Ioyned Rich Blunt, ete. 


Others joyned to them. 


1 Pp. 8, 9. 


85 


The Kiffin Manuscript, under the date 1633, says 
merely : 


Sundry of y® Church whereof M* Iacob & M' Iohn Lathorp had 
been pastors, being dissatisfyed w™ y® Churches owning of English 
Parishes to be true Churches desired dismission & Ioyned to- 
geather among themselves, as M' Henry Parker, etc. 


We have no further information on the matter, but 
from what we have we may judge that an implicit or in- 
formal covenant is probably indicated by the words 
“ Toyned togeather among themselves,” and that a cove- 
nant should have been used is more than natural, since, 
as has been said, those who formed the new church had 
peacefully been dismissed from the older congregation, 
and probably knew no more satisfactory way of forming 
a church ; for Calvinistic Baptists and Arminian Baptists, 
doubtless, had little to do with each other in their earlier 
history. Further, it will be seen later that, in 1652 at 
any rate, John Spilsbury, pastor of this new church from 
1638, or even earlier, certainly held to the view that a 
church covenant was of value in church organization. 

As no English covenants later than those given above, 
till 1640, seem to have been preserved, we may profit- 
ably turn to the earliest covenants made in New Eng- 
land, which can well be termed the Covenant Land. 
Hither had come many of those Englishmen who were 
most interested in religious freedom. The Pilgrim 
Fathers among these had, on their arrival, by covenant 
formed a state, whose inhabitants soon became leading 
factors in the propagation of Congregational views. 
What ‘then, is the early development of the covenant 
idea in America ? 


86 


First, we may properly mention the covenant by 
which the colonists on the ‘‘ Mayflower”’ created a State, 
a new departure in the use of the covenant idea. This 
document, as given by Bradford, at the beginning of 
“The 2 Booke,:reads : 


The forme was as followeth. 

In y® name of god Amen. We whose names are 
vnderwritten, the loyall subjects of our dread soueraigne 
Lord King James, by y® grace of god, of great Britaine, 
Franc, & Ireland king, defender of y° faith, &c. 

Haueing vndertaken, for y® glorie of god, and ad- 
uancement of y® christian faith and honour of our king 
& countrie, a voyage to plant y® first colonie in y° 
Northerne parts of Virginia. doe by these presents 
solemnly & mutualy in y® presence of god, and one of 
another, couenant, & combine our selues togeather into 
a ciuill body politick; for our better ordering, & pre- 
seruation & furtherance of y® ends aforesaid ; and by 
vertue hearof to enacte, constitute, and frame such just 
& equall lawes, ordinances, Acts, constitutions, & offices, 
from time to time, as shall be thought most meete & 
conuenient for y® generall good of y® Colonie: unto 
which we promise all due submission and obedience. 
In witnes wherof we haue herevnder subscribed our 
names at Cap-Codd y° 11. of Nouember, in y® year of y® 
raigne of our soueraigne lord king James of England, 
France, & Ireland y® eighteenth and of Scotland y° fiftic 
fourth. An°: Dom. 1620." 


After the arrival of the Pilgrim Fathers at Plymouth 
in 1620, they seem still to have considered themselves 
members of the Leyden Church, or at least a branch of 
it, for no new church organization seems to have been 


1 Text from photograph copy of the original, found in ‘ Bradford’s History ‘ Of 
Plimoth Plantation.’ From the Original Manuscript.’’ Boston, 1898. P. x10 plus. 


87 


effected, nor was any new covenant formula drawn up 
till 1676, when, during times of trouble, a new covenant 
document was read to the assembled church; but this it 
seems was looked upon only as a renewal of the old 
covenant, for ‘‘the church voted that it should be left 
upon record as that which they did own to be the sub- 
stance of that Covenant which their Fathers enterred 
into at the first gathering of the church.” 

This renewed Mayflower Church covenant of 1676 
with the account of the conditions under which it was 
used, contained in the records of the Plymouth First 
Church, will be given later in chronological order. 

In 1628 the first successful company of Puritan settlers 
arrived on American soil, and founded the colony of 
Massachusetts Bay. The organizer of this settlement 
was Rev. John White, rector of a Puritan church in 
Dorchester, England. It is probable that for some time 
before the colonists left England he and other Puritans, 
through the conscious or unconscious influence of the 
Independents, had been moving toward Separatist prin- 
ciples. At any rate, certain it is that shortly after their 
arrival in America the settlers had adopted in part, at 
least, hitherto despised Congregational, or Independent 
views ; for when in 1629 they formed the Salem Church, 
the first Puritan church in America, they organized it by 
use of a church covenant. Furthermore, the company 
settling Dorchester in 1630 was formed into a church 
estate through Rev. John White’s influence, even be- 
fore it left the shores of England. We are, there- 
fore, not surprised to find that the Puritan churches 
founded at Charlestown-Boston, and Watertown in the 
same year also employed church covenants, though 


88 


that of the Dorchester church unfortunately has not 
been preserved. 3 

It is concerning the early Puritan churches, doubtless, 
that Edward Winslow, in describing the way in which 
the Massachusetts men, in some things, copied after the 
Plymouth way [/ypocrisie Unmasked, etc. (1646), 92], 
says: ‘Which being by them well weighed and con- 
sidered, they also entred into Covenant with God, and 
one with another ¢o walke in all his wayes revealed, or 
as they should bee made knowne unto them, and to wor- 
ship him according to his will revealed in his written 
Heete: 

The covenant of the Salem church used at its formation 
in 1629 and renewed in 1636, and the Charlestown-Boston 
and Watertown covenants of 1630 read as follows: 


word onely, 


THE SALEM COVENANT OF 1629. 


We Covenant with the Lord and one with another ; 
and doe bynd ourselves in the presence of God, to 
walke together in all his waies, according as he is 
pleased to reveale himself unto us in his Blessed word 
of truth.’ 


By this simple covenant, as Prof. Williston Walker has 
clearly shown,’ the first church in the colony of Mas- 
sachusetts was organized. The long covenant, quoted 
in Mather’s “ Magnalia,” 1702, Vol. I.,. p. 18, as that 
made in 1629, is really the renewed covenant of 1636, 
as Professor Walker has indubitably proved by use of 


1See Dr. H. M. Dexter’s “ Congregationalism,” p. 378. Note 64. 


2White’s text of the copy in the Salem church book of 1660, 1661. Cited in Prof. 
Williston Walker’s ‘‘ Creeds and Platforms of Congregationalism.’’ New York. 1893. 
Pwrx16; 


3 By giving White’s text of the covenant of 1636. See pp. 116-118, 


My = bs 
Se ee ee 


A 


89 


White’s text of the copy in the church book of 1660, 
1661.' Mather’s copy is, in fact, imperfect. 

In 1636 Rev. Hugh Peter, formerly of Rotterdam, 
who had there employed the long covenants previously 
cited, became pastor of the Salem church, and at once 
on, or very soon after, beginning his pastoral duties, 
enlarged the original covenant by nine specific articles, 
thereby following the general style of the Rotterdam 
church covenants. 


THE RENEWED SALEM COVENANT OF 1636.’ 


Gather my Saints together unto me that have made a 
Covenant with me by sacrifyce. Ps. 50: 5. 

Wee whose names are here under written, members 
of the present Church of Christ in Salem, having found 
by sad experience how dangerous it is to sitt loose to the 
Covenant wee make with our God: and how apt wee 
are to wander into by pathes, even to the looseing of 
our first aimes in entring into Church fellowship : Doe 
therefore solemnly in the presence of the Eternall God, 
both for our own comforts, and those which shall or maye 
be joyned unto us, renewe that Church Covenant we 
find this Church bound unto at theire first beginning, 
viz: That We Covenant with the Lord and one with 
an other; and doe bynd our selves in the presence of 
God, to walke together in all his waies, according as he 
is pleased to reveale himself unto us in his Blessed word 
of truth. And doe more explicitely in the name and 
feare of God, profess and protest to walke as followeth 
through the power and grace of our Lord Jesus. 

1 first wee avowe the Lord to be our God, and our 
selves his people in the truth and simplicitie of our spirits. 

2 We give our selves to the Lord Jesus Christ, and 
the word of his grace, fore the teaching, ruleing and 


1“ Creeds and Platforms,’’ pp. 116-118. 2 oid. 


go 


sanctifyeing of us in matters of worship, and Conversa- 
tion, resolveing to cleave to him alone for life and glorie ; 
and oppose all contrarie wayes, canons and constitutions 
of men in his worship. 

3 Wee promise to walke with our brethren and sis- 
ters in this Congregation with all watchfullnes and ten- 
dernes, avoyding all jelousies, suspitions, backbyteings, 
censurings, provoakings, secrete risings of spirite against 
them ; but i in all offences to follow the rule of the Lord 
Jesus, ‘and to beare and forbeare, give and forgive as he 
hath taught us. 

4 In publick or in private, we will willingly doe noth- 
ing to the ofence of the Church but will be willing to 
take advise for our selves and ours as occasion shalbe 
presented. 

5 Wee will not in the Congregation be forward eyther 
to shew oure owne gifts or parts in speaking or scrupling, 
or there discover the fayling of oure brethren or sisters 
butt atend an orderly cale there unto; knowing how 
much the Lord may be dishonoured, and his Gospell in 
the profession of it, sleighted, by our distempers, and 
weaknesses in publyck. 

6 Wee bynd our selves to studdy the advancement 
of the Gospell. in all truth and peace, both in regard 
of those that are within, or without, noe way sleighting 
our sister Churches, but useing theire Counsell as need 
shalbe: nor laying a stumbling block before any, noe. 
not the Indians, whose good we desire to promote, and 
soe to converse, as we may avoyd the verrye appear- 
ance of evill. 

7 We hearbye promise to carrye our selves in all law- 
full obedience, to those that are over us, in Church or 
canon ale knowing how well pleasing it will be to 

the Lord, that they should have incouragement in theire 
places, by our not Breiyeine theyre spirites through our 
Irregularities. 

8 Wee resolve to approve our selves to the Lord in 

our perticular calings, shunning ydleness as the bane of 


OI 


any state, nor will wee deale hardly, or oppressingly with 
any, wherein we are the Lord’s stewards : 

9g alsoe promyseing to our best abilitie to teach our 
children and servants, the knowledg of God and his 
will, that they may serve him also; and all this, not by 
any strength of our owne, but by the Lord Christ, whose 
bloud we desire may sprinckle this our Covenant made 
in his name. 


THE CHARLESTOWN-BosTON COVENANT! 
OF JULY 30, 1630 


In the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, & in Obe- 
dience to His holy will & Divine Ordinaunce. 

Wee whose names are herevnder written, being by His 
most wise, & good Providence brought together into 
this part of America in the Bay of Massachusetts, & de- 
sirous to vnite our selves into one Congregation, or 
Church, vnder the Lord Jesus Christ our Head, in such 
sort as becometh all those whom He hath Redeemed, & 
Sanctifyed to Himselfe, do hereby solemnly, and re- 
ligiously (as in His most holy Proesence) Promisse, & 
bind ou'selves, to walke in all our wayes according to the 
Rule of the Gospell, & in all sincere Conformity to 
His holy Ordinaunces, & in mutuall love, & respect each 
to other, so neere as God shall give vs grace, 


Concerning events connected with the preparation of 
this covenant, Professor Walker says :? 


The sickness incident to new settlements in those days of little 
sanitary knowledge afflicted Winthrop’s company at Charlestown 
severely. In their distress Winthrop appealed to the Salem 
church for advice. At Salem there were present, on the reception 
of this request, three of the more prominent members of the 


1 Text from A. B. Ellis’s “‘ History of the First Church in Boston,” p: 3. Cited 
-by Prof. Williston Walker in his “‘ Creeds and Platforms,” p. 131. 

2 History of the Congregational Churches in the United States.”” New York, 
1894, p. 112. 


Q2 


Plymouth body, Fuller, Winslow, and Allerton. . . By the joint 
counsel of the Salem church and of the representatives of that of 
Plymouth, Friday, July 30, 1630, was appointed as a fast in view 
of the sickness, and by the same advice covenanted churches 
were organized on that day at Charlestown and Watertown. At 
Charlestown such care was exercised in admission to this new 
fellowship, that on the day of beginning only four, Governor Win- 
throp, Isaac Johnson, Thomas Dudley, and Rev. John Wilson 
were united—a number which was rapidly augmented during the 
ensuing weeks. 


THE WATERTOWN COVENANT OF JULY 30, 1630' 
JULY 30, 1630 


We whose Names are hereto subscribed, having 
through God’s Mercy escaped out of Pollutions of the 
World, and been taken into the Soczety of his People, 
with all Thankfulness do hereby both with Heart and 
fland acknowledge, 7hat his Gracious Goodness, and 
Fatherly Care, towards us: . And for further and more 
full Declaration thereof, to the present and future Ages, 
have undertaken (for the promoting of his G/ory and the 
Churches Good, and the Honour of our Blessed /esus, in 
our more full and free subjecting of our selves and ours, 
under his Gracious Government, in the Practice of, and 
Obedience unto all his Holy Ordinances and Orders, 
which he hath pleased to prescribe and impose upon us) 
a long and hazardous Voyage from Last to Wes?, from 
Old England in Europe, to New-England in America ; 
that we may walk before him, and serve him, without 
~ Fear in Holiness and Righteousness, all the Days of our 
Iives: And being safely arrived here, and thus far on- 
wards peaceably preserved by his special Providence, 
that we may bring forth our Intentions into Actions, 
and perfect our Resolutions, in the Beginnings of some 
Just and Meet Executions ; We have separated the Day 
above written from all other Services, and Dedicated it 


1 Text from Cotton Mather’s “ Magnalia,” London, 1702, Bk. III., p. 83. 


93 


wholly to the Lord in Divine Employments, for a Day of 
Affucting our Souls, and humbling our selves before the 
Lord, to seek /zm, and at his Hands, a Way to walk in, 
by Fasting and Prayer, that we might know what was 
Good in jus Sight: And the Lord was intreated of us. 
For in the End of that Day, after the finishing of our 
publick Duties, we do all, before we depart, solemnly 
and with all our Hearts, personally, Man by Man for our 
selves and ours (charging ¢hem before Christ and his 
Elect Angels, even ¢hem that are not here with us this 
Day, or are yet unborn, That they keep the Promise 
unblameably and faithfully unto the coming of our Lord 
Jesus) promise, and exter into a sure Covenant with the 
Lord our God, and before him with one another, by 
Oath and serious Protestation made, to Renounce all 
L[dolatry and Superstition, Will-Worship, all Humane 
Lraditions and [nventions whatsoever, in the Worship of 
God; and forsaking all Avz/ Ways, do give ourselves 
wholly unto the Lord Jesus, to do him faithful Service, 
observing and keeping all his Statutes, Commands, and 
Ordinances, in all Matters concerning our Reformation ; 
his Worship, Administrations, Ministry, and Govern- 
ment; and in the Carriage of our selves among our 
selves, and one towards another, as he hath prescribed 
in his Holy Word. Further swearing to cleave unto chat 
alone, and the true Sense and meaning thereof to the 
utmost of our Power, as unto the most clear Zzght and 
infallible Awe, and All-sufficient Canon, in all things 
that concern us in this our Way. In Witness of all, we 
do ex Animo, and in the presence of God, hereto set our 
Names, or Marks, in the Day and Year above written. 


ae 1639 the covenant idea had become so popular 


} 


in the minds of the Massachusetts and New Haven colo- 


nists, that even towns were organized by covenant. This 


was the case at “ Menunkatuck, afterwards Guilford,” 
founded in that year. The Guilford covenant was made 


i 


94 


on shipboard, before the colonists reached this country, 
and reads as follows :? 


June 1. Individuals who, the next September, pur- 
chase Menunkatuck, afterwards Guilford, enter into the 
following covenant: ‘‘We whose names are hereunder 
written, intending by God’s gracious permission to plant 
ourselves in New England, and, if it may be, in the 
southerly part about Quinnipiack, we do faithfully 
promise each to each, for ourselves and our families, and 
those that belong to us, that we will, the Lord assisting 
us, sit down and join ourselves together in one entire 
plantation, and to be helpful each to the other in any 
common work, according to every man’s ability, and as 
need shall require; . . As for our gathering together in 
a church way, and the choice of officers and members 
to be joined together in that way, we do refer ourselves 
until such time as it shall please God to settle us in our 
plantation. 


This was signed by Henry Whitfield and twenty-four 
others. In fact the church was the dominant force in 
these colonial settlements from the first, but her power 
was greatly enlarged when, in 1631, the Massachusetts 
general court prescribed that the franchise should be 
limited to church-members. In the New Haven colony 
also the same law prevailed, so that in these two settle- 
ments at least, joining in covenant became quite neces- 
sary if one desired much influence. In the Plymouth 
and Connecticut colonies the franchise was not thus 
restricted. . 

The two earliest Baptist churches in this country were 
organized before 1640, namely, the First Church in 


1 Text given by Rev. J. B. Felt, rx. p., in his ‘* Ecclesiastical History of New 
England.’’ Boston, 1855. Vol. I., pp. 406, 407. 


95 


Providence, R. I., formed in 1638, and the church in 
Newport, R. I., founded not long after. The Providence 
church, however, never adopted a covenant, and the 
records of the Newport church in the early days were in 
the hands of the pastors, and have but partially been 
preserved, so that its original church covenant, if indeed 
there was one, is no longer known. 


96 


CHAPTER -VIit 


THE LITERARY DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE CHURCH 
COVENANT IDEA 


E have now seen that in the colonies, notably of 

Massachusetts Bay and New Haven, the cove- 
nant idea had grown into a prominence unequaled else- 
where, and that even the American Puritans before 1640 
had adopted it as the most satisfactory method of organ- 
izing their churches, and even their settlements. That 
the prominence given to this idea should long remain 
unnoticed by English Puritans could not be expected. 
In those years, it would seem, the future of the church 
covenant depended largely on American influence, for 
while there were Independents in England who used 
the covenant, yet their number was comparatively insig- 
nificant. The Baptists seem for the time to have re- 
jected it, or at least to have given it a minor position, 
and from Holland the best Independents in general had 
emigrated to America. Among the English Puritans 
as a whole, and to a large extent in general among 
English Dissenters, excepting of course the Independ- 
ents, the church covenant never was popular, and it is, 
therefore, but natural that a discussion of considerable 
length developed concerning it. Yet after 1640 it is 
certain that, even in England, the church covenant 
became thereby not oniy better known, but more ex- 


97 


tensively used, and, doubtless, the rapid increase in the 
number of English Independent churches was due, at 
least in some measure, to the influx of Puritans. 

It has already been shown that literature indirectly 
discussing the church covenant had begun to appear as 
early as 1588. As the years passed, the number of 
those dissatisfied with the term increased, for men were 
seeking to discover the New Testament mode of form- 
ing Christian churches, and many could find no warrant 
for Robert Browne’s conception of the New Covenant. 
The English Baptists before 1640 called the New Cove- 
nant a “Covenant of Life and Salvation,” but they did 
not understand that the Apostles ever made use of a 
church covenant such as Browne had used in the forma- 
tion of his church in Norwich. 

It must be remembered, however, that the discussion 
now to be considered was carried on chiefly between 
American and English Puritans. Presbyterians, also, 
frequently joined in it, but in general English Baptists 
do not appear to have participated to any great extent, 
if at all. 

The English Puritans had been leaning more and 
more toward such a Presbyterianism as Cartwright had 
advocated, and no doubt it was the cause of some con- 
sternation to them to find their New England brethren 
thus turning in another direction. It is certainly proba- 
ble that the English in general would never have been 
so stirred by the question of the true apostolic church 
polity if the comparatively insignificant congregations of 
Separatists in England had been the only source of dis- 
sent to fear. Now, however, an entirely new aspect had 


been given to the danger which might threaten the Estab- 
: G 


98 


lished Church, and the Presbyterian Church, for Inde- 
pendency or Congregationalism had now itself become a 
State Church, and, not content with so much success, was 
endeavoring with energy to gain a foothold in England. 
The English government would naturally have attempted 
to put down such an upstart movement, but two historic 
events probably prevented : first, the signing by Parlia- 
ment of the Solemn League and Covenant in 1643, in the 
closing words of which “encouragement”’ is besought of 
God “to other christian Churches groaninge vnder, or in 
danger of the yoke of Anti-christian tyranny to Joyne 
in the same, or like assocac6n and couenant to the glory 
of God the enlargement of the Kingdome of Jesus 
Christ,’ etc. ; secondly, the rise of Cromwell and the 
army to controlling power in England. 

The great question of course, in this discussion was, 

_What is the true method of organizing a gospel church? 
Now, in the Congregational polity the covenant was 
fundamental, and hence in this discussion there was 
much criticism concerning it. 

As early as 1634 John Cotton’s “Questions and 
Answers upon Church Government” was written and 
possibly it was circulating in the Mother Country even 
before it was printed. Soon other works appeared, 
many of them bearing directly or indirectly on the 
church covenant idea. In 1638, for instance, after the 
renewal of the National Covenant of Scotland, two works 
appeared, evidently to answer certain objections of 
scrupulous Scotchmen. These were followed in 1639 
by J. Hall’s “ Certaine irrefragable propositions concern- 
ing oaths and church government, worthy serious con- 
sideration,” etc., which may have had some effect in 


99 


dampening the desire of Puritans in England to use 
covenants in organizing their churches, for in the pre- 
face of “A | DrFEncr or THE | Answer made unto the 
Nine Questions | or Positions sent from New-kngland, 
| Against the | Repry Tuerero | By | That Reverend 
servant of Christ, | Mr. John Ball; |... 1645,” it is said, 
it had been claimed against the American Puritans: 


Secondly, that we [the American Puritans] make a vocall 
Church Oath or Covenant, the essentiall Jorme of a Church, 
whereas... it ts far from our practise to use any Oath tn our 
Covenant, and strange to us to read so many Pages against our 
Church Oath, and swearing to a Covenant, to make our courses 
horrid and too rigorous. 


In 1641 pamphlets and books discussing the question 
of church government from the point of view of the 
Congregationalist, of the Puritan, and of the Presbyte- 
rian began to become so numerous in the book market | 
that “An Extract of a Letter written from a Minis | ter | 
in New England, to a Member of the | Assembly of 
Divines,” printed in 1646 in Thomas Edwards’ “The 
Second Part | of | GANGRaNa” says :?  “ Discipline, or | 
Church Government is now the great businesse of the 
Christian World.”” The main discussion between Eng- 
lish and American writers may perhaps be said to have’ 
lasted about fifteen or twenty years, and gradually de- 
veloped in America into the Half-Way Covenant Contro- 
versy, which continued to agitate the minds of American 
Congregationalists for a century and a half. 

We may now inquire, What of all the early works 
that refer to the church covenant are specially worthy of 


PP. 33; +P. 166. 


100 


our notice, what were the ideas advanced, and what in- 
fluence did the discussion have on the practice of the 
churches in regard to the covenant? 

One of the most important books for our consider- 
ation is, doubtless, ‘““A Letter of Many Ministers in Old 
England, Requesting the Judgement of their Rever- 
end Brethren in Mew Lugland concerning Nine Posi- 
tions Written Anno Dom. 1637,” published at London, 
July 30, 1643. The following quotations from this will 
give us a clear idea of the nature of the English Puri- 
tans’ objections to the church covenant : 


That Church Covenant which is necessary was not in use in the 
Apostles times, but the Covenant they entred into bound no man 
to this condition for ought we reade. They did not prescribe it, 
no church ever yet covenanted it as necessary to the preservation 
of the body.! 

And here we intreat leave to put you in minde of that which 
you have considered already, schil. That the Church and every 
member thereof hath entred into Covenant, either expresly or 
implicitely to take God for their God, and to keepe the words of 
the Covenant and doe them, to seeke the Lord with all their 
hearts, and to walke before him in truth and uprightnesse : but 
we never finde that they were called to give account of the worke 
of grace wrought in their soules, or that the whole Congregation 
were appointed to be Judge thereof.? 

The second thing you affirm is, that not only the covenant of 
grace which is common to all beleevers ; but Church-Covenant 
also which is peculiar to confederates is necessarie to the partici- 
pation of the Seales.’ 


Having quoted Acts 10 : 43-48, those writing this 
“Letter? say 2“ but. there is nek a word -of- Church: 
Covenant, either in the [nstitution or administration of. 


1P. 79. 2 P. 81, incorrectly numbered 73. 3 P. 68, 


IOI 


the Seales before they [those converted by the Apostles ] 
were admitted to them.” ! 

In “An Apologie | of the Churches | in New-England 
| for Church-Covenant. | or, | A Discourse touching 
the Covenant | between God and men, and especially 
concerning Church-Covenant, that is to say, The | Cove- 
nant which a Company doe enter into when | they 
become a Church ; and which a. parti- | cular person 
enters into when he becomes a member of a Church.” 
‘Sent over in Answer to Master Bernard, | in the yeare 
1639,” printed in London in 1643, are further extended 
and clear statements of the views of both the English 
and the American Puritans. In this book, perhaps, we 
find the first direct testimony to the influence of the 
Scotch Solemn League and Covenant of 1643 on the 
Congregationalists, for evidently no sooner had Mr. 
Richard Mather,” the writer of the above work, in New 


England, seen the clause of encouragement to other 


1 P. 69. 


2Mr. Richard Mather is shown to be the author of this “‘ Apologie’”’ by the follow- 
ing statement from the preface “‘ To the READER” of a work entitled “A | DISPU- 
TATION | concerninc | Church-Members | AND THEIR | CHILDREN, | 1n | AN- 
SWER | ro | XXI. QUESTIONS: | Now Published by a Lover of Truth | London, 
1659,’ in which the statement occurs : “perhaps the Reader may have been deceived 
in some other Treatises, which have gone abroad, and generally been look’ t upon, as 
the compilement of the Elders in New-England; whereas they had but one private 
person for their Author. So it is indeed in the 32 Questions, the Answerer 
whereof was Mr. Richard Mather, and not any other Elder or Elders in New-Eng- 
land, who likewise zs the Author of the discourse concerning Church-Covenant 
printed therewith, which latter he wrote for his private use in his own study, 
never intending, nor indeed consenting to its publication, nor so much as knowing 
unto this day how the copy of it came abroad into those hands by whom itis made 
publick, save that he conjectures some procured a copy of tt from Mr. Cotton, to 
whom (such was their intimacy in his life time) he communicated it, as he writes 
in a late Letter toa son of his now in England who it seems had enquired of him 
concerning those Treatises; and much lesse is there any truth in that which is 
said in the Title page prefixed to the Discourse of Church-Covenant, as if 7t were 
sent over to Mr. Barnard Anno 1639; Mr. Mather having neither acquaintance nor 
any intercourse by Letters with Mr. Barnard.” (Prof. Williston Walker’s “ Creeds 
and Platforms,” p. 289.) 


102 


Christian churches ‘to Joyne in the same, or like asso- 
cacon and couenant,” than he published the following 
defense of the New England method of organizing 
churches : 


By entring into Covenant with God, a people come to be the 
Lords people, that is to say, his Church. 

2. If it was of all the people together, the reason was because 
that Church was a nationall Church : now if a nationall Church be- 
comes a Church by entring into solemne Covenant with God then a 
Congregationall Church becomes a Church by the same means. ! 


In speaking of the Covenant of the Jewish people a 
passage is quoted to the effect that 


this Covenant was of the whole Church with God and there- 
fore not like our Church-Covenants, which are between the Church 
and the members, concerning watchfulnesse over one another, and 
the like.* 

But this place of Deut. 29 ts not sufficient to prove a Church- 
Covenant in these days: because tt ts in the Scriptures of the old 
Testament, for whatsoever must be used in the dayes of the old 
Testament, must not be proved from the Scriptures of the New 
Testament, or else tt ts to be layd aside.* 

2 But [says the writer of the ‘‘Apologie’’] suppose there were 
not pregnant places for it [the church covenant] in the New Tes- 
tament, yet it is not enough to prove the same unlawfull : for what- 
soever Ordinance of the old Testament, is not repealed in the 
New Testament, as peculiar to the Jewish Paedagogie, but was of 
morall and perpetuall equitie, the same bindes us in these dayes, 
and is to be accounted the revealed will of God in all ages. * 

Another Scripture to prove the same [the propriety of a church 
covenant], is Deut. 26. 16, 17, 18 with Deut. 29. 9. This day 
the Lord hath commanded thee to doe these Statutes and Judg- 
ments, thou shalt therefore keepe and doe them, &c. Ti hou hast 
avouched the Lord this day'to be thy God, and to walke in his 


DPBS, 0: a) a Aer SP. 8s 45? 8, 


103 


wayes, and to keep his Statutes, Sc. And the Lord hath 
avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people; Take heed 
and harken, O Israel, this day thou art become the people of the 
Lord thy God.' 


Having spoken of the marriage of the Church to 
Christ, the author quotes the following objection of their 
opponents to the church covenant : 


But this spirituall marriage ts between Christ and the Church, 
But the Church-Covenant ts between the Church and the members, 
and therefore this marriage doth not prove the Church-Covenant.* 


To this answer is made: 


But properly the marriage is between Christ & the Church, and 
so is the Covenant also, so farre as therein they give up 
themselves to Christ as unto an head and Lord ; as a woman 
in the Covenant of marriage doth give up her selfe unto her hus- 
band ; And the performance of such duties as the Church and 
the members owe one unto another, is a branch of the marriage- 
Covenant,* wherein they are tyed to Christ ; for Christ himselfe 
in his Covenant requires, not only that they should give up them- 
selves to him, but also that they should performe these duties 
one unto another.* It is not habitation in the same Towne that 
distinguisheth Churches, and Church-members from other men, 
but their mutuall agreement and combination and joyning them- 
selves together in an holy Covenant with God 5 


The author quotes also the following objections to 
the church covenant idea: 


But joyning doth not alway signifie joyning in Covenant ; Philip 
Joined to the Eunnuchs chariote, and dust to mens year, Act. $: 


Ly Paro 2P. rr. 


3It seems possible that this view of the church covenant as a Marriage Covenant 
may have been taken from the views of Melchior Hofmann the Anabaptist, and his fol- 
lowers. It will be remembered that this was his favorite original idea, 


NRE hey 5P. 14, 


104 
29. & Luke Io, 11. and yet there was no Covenant, and there- 
Sore men may joyne to the Church without any Covenant. 

Church Covenant is a Terme that ts not found in Scripture. 
To this answer is made ‘‘So is Sacrament, Trinitie, &c.’’? 

But this Church-Covenant puts some disparagement upon the 
Covenant of Grace, which every beleever ts already entered into 
with God, and seems to charge the same with iusuffictency ; for 
every second Covenant doth argue that the first was not fault- 
lessex Teh s. 7. 

But the Scripture, Act. 2. 41. tels of joyning to the Church 
without any Covenant, For it was not possible that 3000 should 
enter into covenant tn one day.* 

But why ts there so little proofe of this Church-Covenant in 
the New Testament.® 


To this last the following answer is given : 


The Apostles do sufficiently testifie, that such a thing was prac- 
tised in their dayes, else how should we understand that fellow- 
ship in the Gospel in its full latitude and breadth, Phil. 1. ert 
this combining into Church-fellowship be no part thereof.® 


The signing of the Scotch Solemn League and Cove- 
nant in 1643, doubtless influenced the writer of the above 
work, and no doubt led to the writing and publishing of 
“The Saints’ Solemn Covenant with their God,” by John 
Brinsley, London, 1644, in which he says :7 


Such a Covenant had the people of the Jews entred and made 
with their God, a Covenant, and a Solemne Covenant. And such 
a Covenant must all the Lords People enter with their God, all 
that would be owned and acknowledged of God as his People, as 
his Saints, they must strike Covenant, and a Solemne Covenant 
with thetr God. Upon these two J shall insist severally, briefly 
by way of Expiication, putting them together in the Application. 


bd Beate 2P. ac. 3 Por: 4P. 28. 
PRE aor 6 P31. TPG; 


105 


In 1648 appeared Thomas Hooker’s work, eltitled ) 
“A | Survey | of the Summe of | Church-Discipline. | 
Wherein, | The Way of the Churches of | New-England 
| is warranted out of the Word.’ This contains the 
following valuable statements in regard to the church 
covenant : 


That then which gives the formality of these Churches we are 
now to inquire : and the conclusion we maintain is this, A/utua/ 
covenanting and confoederating of the Saints in the Sellowship 
of the faith according to the order of the Gospel is that which 
gives constitution and being to a visible church. ! 

2. How the Covenant may be expressed. This Covenant is 
dispensed or acted after a double manner. 

Explicitely 

Either or 

Implicitely. 

An £xfplicite Covenant is, when there is an open expression 
and profession of this ingagement in the face of the Assembly, 
which persons by mutuall consent undertake in the waies of 
Christ. An /mfplicite Covenant is, when in their practice they do 
that, whereby they make themselves zngaged to walk in such a 
society, according to such rules of government, which are exer- 
cised amongst them, and so submit themselves thereunto : but 
doe zo¢ make any verbal profession thereof.? 

Quest. If it be here inquired : How far the covenant ts of 
necessity required ? 

Ans. According to foregoing expressions, the answer may be 
cast into these conclusions following. 

1. An /mplictte Covenant preserves the true zature of the true 
Church, because it carries the formalis ratio of a confoederation 
in it, by which a Church is constituted. Yor Implictte and Ex- 
plicite are but adjuncts, and these separable from the essence. 
And therefore the essence and being of the covenant may consist 
wzth either. 

2. In some cases an Implicite covenant may be fully sufficient. 


1 Pp. 45, 46. 2 Pp. 47. 


106 


‘As, suppose a whole congregation should consist of such, who 
were children to the parents now deceased, who were confoed- 
erate: Their chz/dren were true members according to the rules 
of the Gospel, by the profession of their fathers covenant, though 
they should not make any fersonall and ‘vocall expression of their 
ingagement, as the fathers did. vane ove 3 
3. Its most according to the compleatnesse of the rule, and 
for the better being of the Church, that there be an exflicite 
Covenant. For 
1. Thereby the judgement of the members comes to be in- 
formed and convinced of their duty more fully. 
2. They are thereby £ef¢ from cavilling and starting aside 
from the ¢enure and terms of the covenant, which they 
have professed and acknowledged, before the Lord and 
sO many witnesses. 
3. Thereby their hearts stand under a stronger tye, and 
are more quickened and provoked to doe that, which they 
have before God and the congregation, zagaged them- 
selves to doe.’ 


A work entitled “A | ConsiDERATION | oF | Certaine 
Controversies | at this time agitated | In THE | Kinc- 
DOME of ENGLAND, | Concerning the Government of the 
CuurcuH of Gop. | Written at the Command and ap- 
pointment | of the Walachrian Classis, | By Guzlelimus 
Apollonit, | Minister of the Word of God | at Middle- 
burgh. | And sent from the Walachrian Churches, | to 
declare the sense and consent of | their Churches, to the 
| Synop at Lonpon. | Octob. 16. 1644,” and printed 
in London in 1645, probably contains as sensible a view 
of the church covenant as can be found, and shows how 
widely the discussion had become known. 

The following statements from this book are Sorbo 
of note: ‘ 


1 Pp. 48, 49. 


107 


Question. 

VVHether a Church-Covenant solemnly made between the 
Members and the Governours of a Church publikely before the 
whole Church, whereby the members of a particular Church are 
by a publike and expresse agreement and promise associated and 
united amongst themselves, to exercise the feare and sacred wor- 
ship of God, unity of faith, brotherly love, mutuall edification, 
and all duties of piety in a holy communion with God and 
amongst themselves ; be absolutely necessary and essential to the 
constitution of a true church : so that without this Covenant theré” .:— 
is no true or pure Church, nor true Church member. 


Answer. ; 

THe Reformed Churches judge it necessary to the constitution 
of a particular visible Church, that there be sacred union in the 
exercise of Ecclesiasticall communion, expressed by certaine ex- 
ternall acts appointed by God, and to be exercised in a visible 
Church society, under one ministry, and spirituall discipline. But 
this union, they affirme, the members of a true Church enter into 
amongst themselves, when they are united in one externall pro- 
fession of the truth and holynesse, and in the same baptisme ; 
and will frequent the same divine worship, be subject to the same 
Church Governors, be governed by the same law and jurisdiction 
Ecclesiasticall ; and do submit themselves to the same discipline, 
and partake of the same Supper of the Lord. And in this union 
there is, they affirme, a kind of tacit and virtuall Covenant, which 
uniteth the faithfull into a particular Church : although such a sol- 
emne Covenant betweene them in expresse termes be not publikely 
entered into before the whole Church, as the question requireth. ! 

We deny therefore in this controversy : 

1. That asolemne and expresse Church Covenant, between the 
Governors of a Church and the Members of it, publikely entered 
into before the whole Church, for the performance of all exercises 
of piety in a holy communion with God and amongst themselves, 
is absolutely necessary and essentiall to the constitution of a true 
visible Church, so that without such a Covenant there would be 
no visible Church of God, no member of a true or pure Church. 


PPpw x3; r4. 


108 


2. We deny allso, that by such a Church-Covenant that right is 
obtained which the members of a Church in Ecclesiasticall com- 
munion have to the Sacraments of grace, the privileges of the 
Ecclesiasticall Ministry and other benefits which Christ hath given 
to his Churches. 

The reasons of our denial are these : 

. 1. Because the Apostles have not ordained any such Church- 
Covenant betweene the Members and the Pastors of a Church : 
neither in the admission of Members into the Church did require 
such a Covenant as necessary : but by the Sacrament of Baptisme 
they received such as professed the truth and holinesse into the 
Church visible. ! 

2. Under the Old Testament the particular Churches in the 
Synagogues entred not into any solemne Church Covenant in the 
admission of members : but only on extraordinary occasions, when 
they had made defection from God.? 

3. No man can injoyne any thing upon the consciences of 
men, (as absolutely necessary to injoying the Sacraments of 
divine grace, and the benefits of the Ministery of the Church, ) 
which God hath not injoyned ; without damnable wil-worship. 
But God hath not injoyned such a Covenant on the consciences of 
men as absolutely necessary: for there is no law of God wherein 
he hath injoyned a necessity of this Covenant as the essentiall 
form of Church-communion, so as that without it no man can be 
member of a visible Church, or have right to the seales of the 
Covenant: Therefore the necessity of this Covenant is a will- 
worship ; and so to be rejected. ? 

This Church-Covenant therefore is not the formall reason of our. 
Ecclesiasticall communié in the Church visible. Hence allso 
our Churches of the Netherlands in admitting of Pastors or 
Church members do not enter into any such Church Covenant : 
which yet are true visible Churches of God.* 


One point of great interest that this discussion brought 
out concerning the length and adequate expression of 
the covenant, we cannot afford to overlook. It has al- 


1 Pp. 27, 28. 2P, 28, 3 Pp. 18, 19. 4 P. x09. 


109 


ready been seen that before 1640 two opposite tenden- 
cies were prominent in the drawing up of covenant 
documents, the one to make the covenant short and 
simple in thought and expression, the other to extend 
its content to particulars. During this discussion the 
question further came up as to whether an explicit 
covenant was really necessary to the formation of a 
Christian church. This appears to have been answered 
in the negative, so that after 1640 explicit and implicit ' 
covenants perhaps generally were acknowledged suffi- 
cient. The latter seem at first to have appealed to vari- 
ous bodies of Baptists more than the former, for in the 
records of the formation of some Baptist churches no 
covenant is mentioned. Sometimes, however, the ex- 
pressions used in describing the organization of certain 


1 That American Puritan churches during this period had decided that a Chris- 
tian church could be properly formed without use of an explicit covenant is seen 
from the following: “ Wee frequently acknowledge that this Covenant which con- 
stituteth a Church, is either iniplicite or explicite, and that Congregations in 
England are truly Churches having an implicite covenant.” (A DEFENCE 
OF THE Answer made unto the Nine Questions or Positions sent from New- 
England,” etc. 1645. Preface, p. 13). 

Professor Walker, in speaking of the implicitness allowable in the formation of 
early American Congregational churches says: “the ‘Cambridge Platform’ as- 
serted that a verbal covenant was not the only form of the basal agreement, for ‘a 
company of faithful persons’ express such a union ‘by their constant practise in 
coming together for the publick worship of God, & by their religious subjection unto 
the ordinances of God.’”’ (‘ Hist. of the Congreg. Churches.”” Pp. 217, 218.) 

The passage from which Professor Walker here quotes as given in “ Creeds and 
Platforms,” pp. 207, 208, reads in full as follows: 

“4. This Voluntary Agreement, Consent or Covenant (for all these are here taken 
for the same): Although the more express and plain it is, the more fully it puts us 
in mind of our mutuall duty, & stirreth us up to it, & leaveth lesse room for the quec- 
tioning of the Truth of the Church-estate of a Company of professors, & the Truth 
of membership of particular persons: [6] yet wee conceive, the substance of it is 
kept, where there is a real Agreement & consent, of a company of faithful persons to 
meet constantly together in one Congregation, for the publick worship of God, & 
their mutuall edification: which real agreement & consent they doe express by their 
constant practise in comming together for their publick worship of God, & by their 
religious subjection unto the ordinances of God there: the rather, if wee doe con- 
sider how Scripture covenants have been entered into, not only expressly by word 
of mouth, but by sacrifice; by hand writing, & seal: & also sometimes by silent 
consent, without any writing, or expression of words at all,’’ 


110 


churches, are in actuality those of a church covenant. 
Hence the substance of various Baptist church covenants 
is doubtless in reality written in the records of the re- 
spective churches, but with the word ‘‘covenant”’ omitted. 

However, in the covenants even of those churches 
which granted that a covenant ought not to be merely 
implicit, various degrees of explicitness of expression ate 
to be observed. But in general, from 1630 till 1700, 
covenant documents were brief and simple, though the 
somewhat extended explicit covenant gained the pre- 
eminence in the end. Among the earliest extended 
covenant documents are those of Watertown, 1630, and 
of Salem, 1636, in America; of Rotterdam, 1633, in 
Holland ; and.of Yarmouth, 1643, and Norwich, 1644, 
in England. 

That during the period of the discussion there was a 
considerable difference of opinion as to the suitable ex- 
plicitness of a church covenant may be seen from the 
following passages. 

Robert Baillie, in writing concerning the covenant idea 
of the Independents or Congregationalists in 1645, says : 


Thus much for the matter of their Church : the form of it, not 
Accidental, but Essential and Constitutive, they place in an ex- 
plicite Covenant, wherein, all and every one of the Members, by a 
voluntary Association, without the Authority of either Magistrate, 
or Minister, do binde themselves under a solemn Oath to walk in 
the wayes of the Gospel. . . The Association of these men, thus 
separate into a Covenant, is the essential form of their Church. 


Later in the same work? Baillie evidently quotes 
some American Puritan to the effect that 


a 
1 In “ A Dissvasive from the Errours of the Time.’”’ London, 1645, p. 23. 


2 Pp. 135, 136. 


Pit 


It [the church covenant] is no more with us then this, an assent 
and resolution professed by them that are to be admitted by us, 
with promise to walk in all these wayes pertaining to this Fellow- 
ship, so farre as they shall be revealed to them in the Gospel ; 
thus briefly, indefinitely and implicitly, in such like words and no 
more or otherwise, do we apply our answers to mens consciences. 
Church-covenant, p. 36. Wedeny not, but the Covenant in many 
of the English Congregations is more implicite, and not so plaine 
as were to bee desired; yet therewants not that reall and sub- 
stantiall coming together or agreeing in Covenant. 


William Rathband also has preserved for us an early 
definition’ of the church covenant that gives the follow- 
ing somewhat more complete statement of its proper 
content : 


And thus they [the Independents, or Congregationalists] define 
it. Its asolemne and publicke Promise before the Lord and his 
people, whereby a companie of Christians called (by the power 
and mercie of God) to the fellowship of Christ, and (by his provi- 
dence) to dwell together, and (by his Grace) to love and cleave 
together in the unitie of faith and brotherly love, and desirous to 
partake (according to the will of God) in all the holy Ordinances 
of God together in one Congregation, doe bind themselves to the 
Lord to walke in such wayes of holy worship to him, and of edifi- 
cation one towards another, as God himselfe hath required in 
his word of every Church of Christ and the members thereof. 


The suitable content of an explicit church covenant 
perhaps is even more fully given in Thomas Lechford’s 
“Prain DEALING | or, | Nevvs | FROM | New England.” 
London, 1642. He says:? 


They [the American Congregationalists] solemnly enter into a 


1In “A Brief Narration of Some Church Courses,” etc. London, 1644, p. 15, 16. 
el ae 


| 


Covenant, and held by them to constitute a Church) to this 
effect : wzz. 

‘©To forsake the Devill, and all his workes, and the vanities of 
the sinfull world, and all their former lusts, and corruptions, they 
have lived and walked in, and to cleave unto, and obey the Lord 
Jesus Christ, as their onely King and Lawgiver, their onely Priest 
and Prophet, and to walke together with that Church, in the unity 
of the faith, and brotherly love, and to submit themselves one 
unto an other, in all the ordinances of Christ, to mutuall edifica- 
tion, and comfort, to watch over, and support one another.”’ 


113 


CHAPTER LX 


BAPTIST VIEWS ON THE CHURCH COVENANT IN 
ENGLAND UNTIL 1700 


\ \ JE have now some idea at least of the magnitude 


of this discussion, in which the church covenant 
played so prominent a part, and have learned of the 
views held by Congregationalists, Puritans, Presbyte- 
rians, in England, America, and Holland, concerning the 
covenant idea. What also did the English Baptists 
have to say in regard to it? 

After the return to England, in 1612, of those who had 
become Baptists during their residence in Holland, their 
leaders apparently came to look with increasing disfavor 
on the use of church covenants. Still it is probable that 
an informal covenant was used generally in those 
churches which consisted partly of Pedobaptists and 
partly of Baptists, while in the case of churches formed 
solely of those who had once been members of Inde- 
pendent churches the covenant doubtless continued to 
be employed as the most convenient mode of organizing 
a church. 

That the Baptists were fully aware of this long church 
covenant discussion is perfectly certain (though in gen- 
eral they do not appear to have participated in it to any 
great extent), for in 1645 Hanserd Knollys Renee a 


very important work, entitled 
H 


114 


‘‘A Moderate Answer vnto Dr. Bastwicks Book ; Called, /n- 
dependency not Gods Ordinance. Wherein, Is declared the 
manner how some Chvrches in this City [London] were gathered, 
and upon what tearmes their Members were admitted ; That so 
both the Dr. and the Reader may judge, how near some Be- 
leevers who walk together in the Fellowship of the Gospell, do 
come in their practice to these Apostolicall rules which are pro- 
pounded by the Dr. as Gods method in gathering Churches and 
admitting Members’’—in which work he not only shows a knowl- 
edge of, the discussion concerning the formation of churches by 
covenant, but also gives most valuable testimony as to the forma- 
tion of some of the early Baptist Churches (probably those founded 
by Helwys and Murton). He says in part:1 ‘the Apostles and 
all succeeding Ministers of the Gospell should admit whosoever 
beleeved, and were baptized, to be Members of the Church, and 
teach them to observe no other things but what Christ com- 
manded them, and for which they had his Word and warrant. . . 
And this (saith the Dr.) the Apostles did practice, without requir- 
ing them to take a private covenant, or enter into the Church 
by way of a particular covenant. . . I shall now take liberty 
to declare, what I know by mine own experience to be the practice 
of some Churches of God in this City. That so both the Dr. and 
the Reader may judge how near the Saints, who walk together in 
the Fellowship of the Gospell do come in their practice to these 
Apostolicall rules and practice propounded by the Dr. as Gods 
method in gathering Churches, and admitting Members, I say, 
that I know by mine own experience (having walked with them) 
That they were thus gathered; viz. Some godly and learned 
men of approved guifts and abilities for the Ministerie, being 
driven out of the Countries, where they lived by the persecution 
of the Prelates, came to sojourn in this great City, and preached 
the Word of God both publikely, and from house to house, and 
daily in the Temples and in every house, they ceased not to teach 
and preach Jesus Christ : and some of them have dwelt in their 
own hired houses, and received all that came in unto them, 
preaching the Kingdome of God, and teaching those things, which 


1 P. 13 plus. 


Tis 


concern the Lord Jesus Christ. And when many sinners were 
converted by their preaching of the Gospell, some of them that 
beleeved consorted with them, and of professors a great many, 
and of the chief women not a few. And the condition which 
those Preachers both publikely and privately propounded to the 
people, unto whom they Preached, upon which they were to be 
admitted into the Church was Faith, Repentance, and Baptism ; 
and none other. And whosoever (poor as well as rich, bond as 
well as free, servants as well as masters) did make a profession of 
their Faith in Christ Jesus, and would be baptized with water into 
the Name of the Father, Sonne, and Holy Spirit, were admitted 
Members of the Church ; but such as did not beleeve, and would 
not be baptized they would not admit into Church-communion. 
This hath been the practice of some Churches of God in this City, 
without urging or making any particular covenant with Members 
upon admittance, which I desire may be examined by the Scrip- 
tures cited in the Margent, and then compared with the Doctors 
three conclusions from the same Scriptures. . . And my humble 
request to the Doctor is; That he will use all meanes, that the 
method of God, and practice of the Apostles in gathering of 
Churches, and admitting Members, may be conscionably prac- 
tised by his Brethren of both sides according to the revealed 
Word and Will of the Father.’’ 


That there does not seem to have been entire agree- 
ment as to the covenant idea among the Baptists, how- 
ever, appears from a work of John Spilsbury [in this 
book spelled Spilsbery], republished at London in 1652, 
entitled “A Treatise concerning the Lawfull Subject of 
Baptism.” In this he certainly advocates the formation 
of churches by an informal covenant agreement, as ap- 
pears in the following quotations : 


The covenant itself, is a covenant of grace and salvation, by 
which God of his grace takes a person or a people to himself for 
his own above all others, and to be their God, and to manifest 
upon them the riches of his grace and glory : and the manner of 


116 


which is in effect but onely thus much: Gods calling of a man 
to an agreement with himself in his Sonne, wherein he promises 
to be his God, and to give him life and happiness, and all things 
in Christ, and that he shall believe and rest upon his faithfulness 
and truth, and to take him for his God, &c. And thus I say, 
God and man come to an agreement in Christ, upon something 
passing between them, wherein they both agree, and this is called 
a covenant ; and I call it a covenant of grace, when the thing 
agreed upon is a subject of grace ; as Gods giving of man life and 
peace, and all things in Jesus Christ, and that he will be his God, 
upon whom he shall relie, and believe the accomplishment of all 
things in his due time; and that he shall hear and know his will 
by his Sonne, and obey him in the same ; and mans free consent 
to God again, the he likes of all this well, and concludes with God 
that it shall be so. For a covenant pre-supposeth two persons at 
least, and also something to agree, or covenant upon: thus did 
God with Abraham, and so he doth with every believer ; and 
chiefly when God takes any into a Church-fellowship. . . And so 
much for the covenant, and what the same is.! 

This I think we all agree in, that matter and form constitutes 
a Church, the matter is a company of Saints, or persons profess- 
ing faith in the righteousness of Jesus Christ, and living accord- 
ingly, that is, in holinesse of life. The form is that by which 
these are united and knit up together in one fellowship, and 
orderly body, and that is the covenant of grace that lies between 
God and his people ; by which God, visibly becomes the God of 
such persons, and they his people above all other. That this is 
the form of a Church ; and not baptism, I prove thus ; That by 
which God and a people become each others apart from all other 
people, that is the form of them: But the Covenant is that by 
which God owns a people for his, and they him for their God, 
therefore the covenant is the form.? __ 

2. That which makes a member to be a member or no mem- 
ber of a Church, that makes a Church to be a Church or no 
Church, and so that is the form of it, for there is the same reason 
for the whole, that is for every part; But the covenant is that 


a Pree. 2 Pp. 67, 68. 


bi 


which makes a member, and so the rest. . . Therefore the cove- 
nant is the form. 

3. That which persons may have, and yet be no Church, that 
cannot be the form of a Church: But persons may have bap- 
tism, and yet no Church ; Therefore not the form. The Church 
being the greatest ordinance of God, and the very center of 
all ordinances, as . . . cannot be formed by any particular 
ordinance, no not by any lesse than that which comprehends 
all the essential parts and properties of a Church, which is 
Gods gracious covenant, that gives being to all true Churches 
both first and last.! 

[In the first sense] baptism is one branch of the Covenant, 
as a truth to be revealed, and by faith to be received, as an essen- 
tial truth, together with other truths, for the constituting of the 
Church, and no Church according to the order of Christs new 
Testament, either without it, or before it. 

But for the last, namely, the outward administration of bap- 
tism, that ever follows the Saints mutual faith and agreement in 
the doctrine, wherein consists the covenant, which ever goes 
before the administration of baptism. So that in the first sense, 
the Church is not before Baptism; but in the last sense, the 
Church is before baptism, though not in her visible order. 
Again, a Church is only so a Church before baptism, as that the 
end of her union is for communion.’ 

This will be further cleared in the constituting of the Church, 
which now follows, which constitution is the orderly colleetion or 
conjoining of persons into the New Covenant, or visible union 
with Christ their head, as their mutual faith and agreement in the 
truth to the practise of it, and so consequently into an orderly 
body among themselves ; wherein the Saints are the matter, and 
the covenant the form ; from which two concurring, the Church 
ariseth, and is by them constituted. 

Now for the constituting causes by which God ordinarily 
useth to effect this work ; they are these : | 

1. The word of God, which is to fit and prepare the matter 
for the form. 


1P, 68 2 P. 68. 


118 


2. The confession of faith, which is to declare the fitness of 
the matter for the form. 

3. The free and mutual consent and agreement of the par- 
ticular persons, upon the practise of the same truth believed and 
confessed, as aforesaid. 

And lastly, the Spirit of Christ.! 

And now being come into her [the church’s] own land, as of 
old was signified, Ezek. 36. 24, 25, which is, into a visible cove- 
nant with God, or union with Christ, and so become his own, she 
is now to be washed with water in baptism, as Ezek. 16. 8, 9... 
And thus being in Covenant with God by faith in Jesus Christ, in 
which their state consists ; and so the agreement made, and the 
covenant passed between them, now the seal is set to, which is 
the outward ordinance of Baptism, to confirm the same ; which 
being done she is to enter upon her holy communion in all the 
rest of God's holy ordinances thereunto belonging, for her com- 
fort and well being, so that communion in any thing is from union 
first with the same.? 


In 1676 Edward Hutchinson published “A | Treatise 
| Concerning the | Covenant and Baptism | Dialogue- 
wise between | a Baptist & a Poedo-Baptist.” In this 
book he speaks much of the covenant promises, and of 
what the new covenant means and is. He seems to take 
the position in general that Helwys and Murton had 
taken half a century before. At any rate, he evidently 
does not believe in the use of the church covenant, for 
he says :3 


Bap. But what do you mean by promise? is it the promise 
and covenant of eternal life and salvation ? 


And again :* 


4. The Jndependants have their believers, and they are such 
_who own the faith of Christ, make a personal manifestation of 


1 Pp. 69, 70. 2P. 72. C8 Wo ass oP e52s 


————— 


eee 


119 


their faith and repentance, and so are enchurcht and become 
members (by a Covenant) of some particular congregations. 


In 1681 “A Sober Discourse of Right to Church- 
Communion. By W. Kiffin a lover of Truth and Peace,” 
was published in London. This work incidentally refers 
to the author’s position in regard to the church covenant 
idea. He seems to have held a view which required the 
use of no formal church covenant, but which neverthe- 
less embraced what was fundamental in the covenant idea, 
yet without making it seem utterly non-apostolic in origin. 

Respecting the covenant idea, he says : 


Besides Christ looks for a Believer, which no Infant can at 
present be said to be, the want of which, makes the Baptism null, 
for if there be no Bond, no Covenant, no Obligation in it (as ’ tis 
plain there is not, and they confess it) then there is no Sealing, for 
a Seal serves but to Ratifie & Confirm a Bond and Covenant. ! 

All things necessary to this purpose are comprised in the 
solemn Form of our initiation into Covenant with God, Matth. 28. 
19. Our Lord Jesus Christ Commands his Apostles to Disciple 
all Nations, Baptizing them in the Name. . . this is the Foun- 
dation we lay of all our Obedience and Profession, which are to 
be regulated by this Intitial Ingagement.? 

‘‘Baptism is our initiation’’ and ‘This is the Pledge of our 
entring into Covenant with God, and our giving up our selves 
unto him in the Solemn Bond of Religion."’ 4 

The Covenant binds mutually on Gods part and on ours ; 
and so do the Seals which belong to the Covenant. It doth not 
only Seal Pardon and Sanctification on Gods part, but there is a 
promise and answer on our part: an answer to what? To the 
demands of the Covenant. . . Now our Answer to this Demand 
of God, and to this Interrogatory he puts to us in the Covenant, 
it is sealed by us in Baptism ; and it is Renewed in the Lords 
Supper, * etc. 


1 Pp. 77, 78. 2 P. 9. 3 P. 100. 4 P. 103. 


120 


In 1693 Benjamin Keach published a work in London 
entitled “The | Ax laid to the root: | ete. in the séc- 
ond part of which, speaking of the constitution of a 
gospel church, he says :? 


The Gospel Church is not constituted, as the Jewish Church 
was, ‘tis not National, but Congregational ; it consisteth not of 
the carnal Seed as such, but only of the spiritual Seed, 2 e., 
Adult Persons who believe. Where do we find, in all the New 
Testament, That the Children of Believers as such, were Bap- 
tized, and taken into the Church, as being in an external relative 
Covenant? 


In 1694, or thereabouts, Mr. Keach also published 
various pamphlets. A volume of these is preserved in 
the Angus Library in Regent’s Park College, London. 
The first of these pamphlets is entitled “A | Golden 
Mine | Opened.” The last pamphlet (the title is want- 
ing) is imperfect and begins with the third chapter. In 
this pamphlet are the following statements, which seem 
to indicate that Mr. Keach followed John Smyth’s view 
of the covenant rather than Helwys and Murton’s, and 
believed, at least, in the use of some sort of informal or 
implicit covenant agreement after baptism. He says :” 


Arguments to prove that those Churches who are gathered by 
Faith and Repentance, and upon the profession of Faith are 
Baptized (which are called Anabaptists) are true Churches of 
Christ; which Mr. Shute dentes so to be. 

z. Argument All those Churches who are right in matter and 
Jorm are true Churches. 

But those Churches, falsely called Anabaptists, are right in 
matter and form ergo they are true Churches. 

The matter of Churches ae godly persons, or true believers ; 


——— 


1 P, 20. 2 P. 34. Close of Chapter IV, 


I21I 


the true form is the order or constitution of the Gospel Church, 
viz. The Adult upon the profession of Faith and Repentance, 
Baptized ; and so with joynt consent give themselves up to the 
Lord, and one to another, to walk in fellowship and communion 
in all the Ordinances of the Gospel. 


These quotations give us some idea of the trend of 
English Baptist thought on the church covenant idea 
down to the close of the seventeenth century. 


122 


CRRA LER os 


THE CHURCH COVENANT AMONG ENGLISH CONGREGATION- 
ALISTS AND BAPTISTS SINCE 1640 


\ \ JE may now properly inquire, What was the 
general outcome of the discussion in England? 

Did the use of the covenant become as prominent a 
characteristic of the church polity of Dissenters in Eng- 
land as it did among the early American colonists ? 

Presbyterianism certainly had not been directly af- 
fected by the discussion, but in 1643 Parliament had 
accepted the Solemn League and Covenant, and thus 
had made Presbyterianism the State religion during the 
Commonwealth period, and doubtless many Puritans may 
now have joined the Presbyterian Church. 

Congregational churches in England also, unquestion- 
ably had been strengthened during these years, and 
American influence had been manifested by a growing 
popularity of the church covenant idea. This may pos- 
sibly be one of the “many other opinions” to which 
reference is made in Thomas Edwards’ “Third Part of 
GANGRAENA,” 
pendency, and many other opinions being first broached 
in Mew-England, have come over into O/d.”’ } 

During this discussion American Congregationalism 
became in general, at ledst, a comparatively established 


where the statement appears that ‘ Inde- 


Pear: 


123 


church polity. Further, the inquiries from England 
which had precipitated the discussion had led to the 
writing of a large amount of literature by men of varied 
views, and had settled many differences of opinion, not 
only in New England, but also abroad. We may well 
believe, therefore, that many in England who once had 
entertained views of preference for the Presbyterian 
church now began to regard the Independent churches 
with more favor and, accordingly, to join them. In this 
sense, then, English Congregationalism is, as was stated 
in Edwards’ ‘“Gangrena,” a development introduced 
from America. The truth of this, in so far as the 
church covenant idea is concerned, is confirmed, in part 
at least, by a quotation from “An Apologie | of the 
Churches | in New England,” London, 1643, in which 
complaint is made by English Puritans that 


The time hath been, when your selves [the American Puritans] 
did not hold Church-Covenant, as now you do, when you were 
in England you were not of this mind, and therefore no marvell 
if your change since your coming to New England be suspected, 
and offenstve.* 


To this charge the following answer is made: 


Some of us? when we were in Z7g/and, through the mercie of 


IP Age 


2Mr. John Cotton was one of these. Concerning his use of a church covenant 
in his church before 1632, while still a member of the Church of England, he has 
given us the following account, communicated to the author by Prof. Williston 
Walker, of Yale University: ‘“‘ There were some scores of godly persons in Bostox 
in Lincoln-shire (whereof some are there still, and some here, and some are fallen 
asleep) who can witnesse, that we entred into a Covenant with the Lord, and one 
with another, to follow after the Lord in the purity of his Worship; which though 
it was defective, yet it was more than the Old Non-conformity. Besides, I had then 
learned of Mr. Parker, and Mr. Baynes, (and soon after Dr. Ames) that the Minis- 
ters of Christ, and the Keyes of the Government of his church are given to each 
particular Congregationall church respectively.”” (‘ The Way of | CONGREGATIONAL 
| CuurcuEs | CLEARED: |” etc. London, 1648, p. 20.) 


124 


‘God, did see the necessitie of Church Covenant; and did also 
preach it to the people amongst whom we ministred, though 
neither so soone nor so fully as were meete, for which we have 
cause to be humbled, and to judge ourselves before the Lord. 


Was the church covenant generally employed in Eng- 
lish Baptist churches, also, after 1640? Before exam- 
ining the most direct testimony of the records, we may 
profitably examine whatever other, though meagre, evi- 
dence there may be. 

When Dr. Daniel Featley published at London in 
1645 his work, entitled ““The Dippers Dipt. or the Ana- 
baptists Dvck’t and Plvng’d over Head and Eares, at a 
Disputation in Southwark,” he evidently believed the 
Baptists did use a covenant in their churches, for in the 
Epistle Dedicatory * he says : 


They [the Anabaptists, or rather Baptists] build one another in 
the faith of their sect, to the ruine of their souls ; ¢hey flock in great 
multitudes to their Jordans, and both Sexes enter into the River, 
and are aipt after their manner with a kind of spell containing 
the heads of their erroneous Tenets, and thetr engaging them- 
selves in their Schismaticall Covenants, and (tf I may so Speake) 
combination of separation. 


Rather more trustworthy, and probably more exact, 
testimony on this point, however, comes to us from the 
manuscript works of the Rev. “ John Lewis, Minister of 
Mergate.”” In one of his manuscript histories of the 
Anabaptists? (for he wrote several), in speaking of the 
Baptist Confession of Faith of 1660, he says: 


III. The Confession 1660, Art. 12 declares, that it is the duty 


1P.3. Text from the Sixth Editién, 1631. 
2 Rawlinson MSS. Press mark C. 410, p. 181 of one of the sections of the vol- 
ume. Bodleian Library, Oxford. 


125 


of all such who are believers baptized to draw . . . unto God in 
submission to that principle of Ch7zs?’s doctrine to wit, Drayer 
and * Laying on of hands, etc. *Some of them [the Anabap- 
tists] would have added a Solemn Covenant, but this was opposed 
by others. 


Later he says further :* 


Some of them likewise, with the Independents, placed the 
form of their Church in an expPlicite Covenant, wherein all and 
every one of the Members by a voluntary Association, without 
the Authority of either Magistrate or Minister do binde themselves 
under a solemn promise to give up themselves to the Lord in a 
Church-state ; than which they thought nothing could lay a greater 
Obligation on their Consciences. But this was opposed by others. 


In another place in John Lewis’ manuscript works 
occurs the following statement * in point, apparently per- 
taining to a time after 1696: 


It has been observed by some among themselves, that there is 
no Law or Command given by Christ or His Apostles for making 
or requiring any Covenant as the Shibboleth of Church Commun- 
ion ; and yet it seems, such a Covenant is required by some of 
the Anabaptist [Baptist] Congregations. 


In other words, even as late as 1660, probably as late 
as 1696, the English Baptists as a body had in reality 
come to no settled agreement in regard to the method 
of organizing their churches. From their works, pre- 
viously quoted also, it would be natural to conclude that 
during the whole seventeenth century they were unset- 
tled on this point. | 

We may now properly make a study of the English 
church covenant documents themselves, in order to know 


1 Reverse side of fol. 181. 2 Reverse side of fol. 166. 


how generally they were employed, what was their usual 
form, and to trace in some manner their development. 


THE COVENANT AMONG ENGLISH CONGREGATIONALISTS 
SINCE 1640. 


It is but fair and natural to begin with the covenants 
of the Independents, as the first Englishmen to make 
use of the church covenant idea. But before giving the 
text of the various documents, it will be profitable to 
see what the Rev. Thomas Harmer has to say concern- 
ing the early English Congregational churches and the 
covenant. He writes :! 


We shall presently see what the plan of these Congregational 
churches was. | 

As these principles were first adopted, in modern times, by the 
English refugees in Holland, it is no wonder they spread more 
generally in these eastern counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, than 
in any other parts of England, which seems to be intimated by 
Doctor Calamy, in his account of the Ejected Ministers. ? 

The Congregational Church at Yarmouth is, I believe, the o/dest 
in this part of the kingdom : it united together in the year 1643.3 

The several times of the embodying of the most ancient of these 
churches that are still subsisting, so far as can be, I believe, 7e- 
covered, are as followeth : 


Yarmouth, 1643. Beccles, fGae. 
Norwich, 1644. Guestwick, 

Walpole, 1647. Wymondham, 1652. 
Bury St. Edmunds, 1648. Bradfield, 1652 or 1653. 
Wrentham, 1649. Wattesfield, 1654. 
Woodbridge, 1651. Denton, 1655.4 


The last particular which I mentioned in the enumeration of 
the distinguishing points of Congregational Church Government 
and Discipline, was their not binding themselves unalterably 


1“ Miscellaneous Works,” 1823. 2P. 146. 35 PA 147; 4 P. 147, note. 


to present arrangements, but a professing themselves willing to 
receive any farther light God should be pleased to communicate 
to them from his word. I have observed this doth not appear in 
the Savoy account of their order ; it was, however, a common 
declaration of those churches in the times preceding that publica- 
tion, at least in these counties : and there is a candour, and sense 
of familiarity in it, which are extremely agreeable. } 

The fourth section of the first chapters of these Heads of Agree- 
ment [in the Savoy Confession] saith, «* 4 competent number of 
visible saints do become the capable subjects of stated commun- 
ion in all the special ordinances of Christ, upon their mutual de- 
clared consent and agreement to walk together therein, according 
to gospel rule. In which declaration different degrees of explicit- 
ness, shalk no ways hinder such churches from owning each other, 
as instituted churches.’ 2 

The O/d Congregationalists seem to have been very fond of the 
term COVENANT, derived from some Old Testament transactions, 
very different from entering into church fellowship, but, as being 
a Scripture term, it appeared extremely veneradde in their eyes, 
and perhaps almost sacred. It was, I am afraid, as adisgustful to 
others, appearing to them (as the New Testament never uses the 
term in such a sense) a misapplication of the word, and a sort of 
enthusiastic affectation. Candour must however admit, that if 
they were sometimes drawn up in too diffusive and otherwise ex- 
ceptionable a manner, they were at other times pleasingly simple. 
As a proof of this, I will here transcribe a form of engagement, 
at the settling of that church in Suffolk, with which the writer of 
these papers has the nearest connexions [ Wattisfield].® 


Having given the text of the Wattisfield covenant 
Mr. Harmer says : 


The seriousness and at the same time the simplicity of this en- 
gagement is such, that I can hardly imagine it would be objected 
to by any. At the same time they appear to be by no means 
attached to the term Covenant; the term Agreement seems to 
have pleased them as well ; as would doubtless any other word of 


ap aRae 2 P. 28; 3 Pp. 159, 160. 


128 


the same general import, and expressive of their uniting together 
in sacred Fellowship, if any could be found less disgustful.* 


The Congregationalists in general seem to have prized 
their records and carefully to have preserved them. 
Such characteristic painstaking in this direction has re- 
sulted to the great advantage of historical research. Of 
at least seven of the early churches in Norfolk and Suf- 
folk, mentioned by Harmer, covenants have been pre- 
served, and also some others of this early period. It 
will be seen that there is no progressive development 
manifested in these covenants. Some are extendedly 
explicit and some are very simple. In general they may 
not be classified more definitely, but the Norwich cove- 
nant is in the main a copy of that of the church in Yar- 
mouth, from which the Norwich church proceeded. They 
are both extended covenants, and manifest the influence 
of Hugh Peter, a perfectly natural fact, for the Yarmouth 
church had been organized by members of the church in 
Rotterdam who had returned to England. 

The following interesting examples of the Independent 
covenants of this very early period in England are worthy 
of examination : 


THE YARMOUTH CovVENANT.? JUNE 28, 1643. 
The account of the organization of the Yarmouth 
church reads : 


After some time by them solemnely spent in praier 
they [those forming the church] entred into a Church 
Pw sae Dalat ie 2 ie Np ee lag hal SS 


1 Pp. 159, 160. 

2 From MS. “Copy of | The Church Book belonging to a Society of Christians | 
who assemble for divine | Worship at the Old Meeting | Norwich. | Transcribed 
from the Original | (kindly lent to him by the Deacons | of that Church) by | 
Joseph Davey | Dect. 1848." P. 3. Doctor Williams’ Library, London. 


129 


Couenant & subscribed their names in the manner fol- 
lowing. It is manifest by Gods word, That God alwaies 
was pleased to walke in a way of Couenant with his peo- 
ple he promising to be their God & they promising to 
be his people seperated from the world & the pollutions 
thereof as may appeare Deut. 29 : 10, 11 &c. Isai. 56. 3 
Se LTS Sy RO RC we A re 

Wee therefore whose names are underwritten being 
desirous, in the feare of God to worship & serue him 
according to his reuealed will doe freely, solemnely, & 
jointly Couenant with the Lord in the presence of his 
Saints & Angels. 

I. That we will for euer acknowledge & auouch God 
for our God in Christ Jesus. 

_ 2. That we will alwaies endeauour through the grace 

of God assisting us to walke in all his waies & ordinances 
according to his written word, which is the onely sufficient 
rule of good life for euery man, neither will we suffer our 
selues to be polluted by any sinfull waies either publike or 
priuate but abstaine from the uery appearance of euill, giu- 
ing no offence to the Jew or Gentile, or Churches of Christ. 

3. That we will in all loue improue our Comunion as 
brethren by watching ouer one another, & as neede 
shalbe, counsell, admonish, reproue, comfort, releeue, 
assist & beare with one another, humbly submitting our 
selues to the gouernment of Christ in his Churches, 

4. Lastly we doe not promise these things in our 
owne, but in Christ’s strength neither doe we confine 
ourselues to the words of this Couenant but shall at all 
times account it our duty to embrace any further light or 
trueth which shalbe reuealed to us out of God’s word. 


THe Norwicu Covenant. ! JUNE 10, 1644. 


The record concerning the organization of the Nor- 
wich church reads : 


1 Norwood Church Book, as copied by Davey. P. 11. Doctor Williams’ Li- 
brary, London. 


I 


130 

Being mett upon the day appointed, in the presence 
of Mr Oxenbridge with diuers of the Church at Yar- 
mouth, & also diuers other godly friends in Norwich 
They spent the former part of the day in prayer; And 
then one in the name of the rest made a profession of 
faith, Whereunto all the rest gaue their assent. Then 
one of them read the Couenant as followeth to which 
they all subscribed their names. 

It is manifest by God’s word that God alwaies was 
pleased to walke in a way of Couenant with his people 
Knit together in a visible Church estate ; he promising 
to be their God & they promising to be his people sepa- 
rated from the world & the pollutions thereof as may 
appeare therein. 

We therefore whose names are subscribed being de- 
sirous (in the feare of God) to worship & serue him 
according to his reuealed will, & beleeuing it to be our 
duty to walke in a way of Church couenant, doe freely 
& solemnly Couenant with the Lord & one another in 
the presence of his saints and Angells. 

1. That we will for euer acknowledge & auouch the 
Lord to be our God in Christ Jesus giuing up our selues 
to him to be his people. 

2. That we. will alwaies endeauour through the grace 
of God assisting us to walke in all his waies & ordi- 
nances according to his written word which is the onely 
sufficient rule of good life for euery man. Neither will 
we suffer our selues to be polluted by our sinfull waies 
either publike or priuate, but endeauor to abstaine from 
the very appearance of euill, giuing no offence to the Jew 
or Gentile or the Churches of Christ. 

3. That we will humbly & willingly submitt ourselues 
to the gouernment of Christ in this Church in the admin- 
istration of the word, the seales & discipline. 

4. That we wiil in all loue improue our comunion as 
brethren by watching dtier one another and (as neede 
shalbe) counsell admonish reproue comfort releeue assist 
& beare with one another seruing one another in loue. 


131 


5. Lastly we doe not Couenant or promise these things 
in our owne but in Christ's strength, neither doe we con- 
fine ourselues to the words of this Couenant, but shall at 
all tymes account it our duty to imbrace any further light 
or trueth which shalbe reuealed to us out of God’s word. 


COVENANT USED AT EDMONSBURY, 1646.! 


Be it knowne vnto all the saints of Sion that wee 
whose names are vnderwritten knowing that there is but 
one eternall God, Creater and Gouernour of all things, 
distinguished into three w beare record in heauen. 

. . And wee seing not only the necesity of this Sepa- 
ration, but also the great need of continuing in Christian 
fellowship, and Societie, and that to be of y° visible 
particular Church of Christ is most needfull for the 
Saints edification in this life it being y® exelentest King- 
dome of grace, wherby they may enioy all the ordinances 
of God, according to their capabillity. And seing that 
there is no such particular Church visible neer vnto VS 
but so remote that wee canot without breach of the Sab- 
oth assemble with, . . And considering that God 
alowes of Particular Churches in one Nation, And wee 
his Saints being possessed with the thoughts of y® ex- 
elencie therof, and the sweete-closing-neer-communion 
which the Saints of God haue with Christ therin, Wee, in 
the Presence of y*® greate God, whose glorious fulness the 
heauen, and y® heauen of heauens canot containe. Wee 
doe therefore, together with our posteritie, Couenant, to 
become a peculiar Temple for the Holy Ghoste to dwell 
in, an entier spouse of Jesus Christ our Lord of glory, for 
y* enioyment of all his holy ordinances, according to his 
Owne institutions, and so to walke in all his waies so far 
as he hath reueiled vnto vs, or shall reueile hearafter. 


1 From MS. “Copy | of the | Old Church Book | belonging to the | Society | of | 
Congregational Dissenters | assembling for divine worship | at the | Meeting House 
| situate in | Whiting Street, | Bury St. Edmunds | Suffolk ;”’ etc., etc. 1646-1801. 
“Transcribed from the Original | by | Joseph Davey | October |) #840. Pp. (5-3, 
Doctor Williams’ Library, 


132 


In testimony wherof (in the town of Edmonsbury in 
Suffolk this 16th day of the moneth commonly called 
August) being the Lord’s day) wee doe now subscribe 
with our hands vnto Jehouah and to his Christ. 


The foregoing, although first in chronological order, 
stands at the end of the book in the original. 

In the Gould Manuscript, No. 23, is “An Account of 
A Church that usually met in Southwark near S' Mary 
Overys Church, from their first Constitution in y® Reign 
of K. Iames |, to their Dissolution in 1705. . . taken 
out of their Church Book, &c.”’ This begins: ‘ Accord- 
ing to y® best Account from Ancient Members therein, 
& such Notices as in Old Books we find: That about y° 
Year 1621 was this Church constituted in Gospel Order, 
& carried on by one M* Hubbert.”’ 

The church was, doubtless, organized by covenant, for 
when Samuel How became a member, the record says: 
“they Solemnly renewed & confirmed their antient League 
& Covenant one w™ another, & then did freely Elect, 
Choose, & Ordain y* Said Sam’. How to be their Pastor.” 

The record reads thus: 


In this Year 1648. there was renewing of their Covenant In 
these words following w I think meet to transcrib, viz: 


Memorandum. That we whose Names are Subscribed In con- 
sideration & sense of our manyfould Sins & Miscariages in our 
personal & publick Relation, & our exceeding unworthy manage- 
ment of y® Scepter of Iesus Christ comitted to us as his Church & 
People, much to his Dishonour & our own Grief of Spirit ; & for 
y® gaining Ability for y® future, to reforme y® Evils amongst Us, 
did address our Selves to y® Lord by Prayer And did in y® Presence 
of him & each other; according to y® measure of Grace afford’ d 
renew & declare our vissible Relation & Intrest to & in him & 
each other, as a Church & Spouse of Christ Iesus, w our Reso- 
lutions to Persevere accordingly as God shall afford Ability. 

Signed y® 23d May, 1648. 


133 


Tue Bury Sr. Epmunps Covenant oF 1648.1 


Decemb the 21" 1648 

We those names are heare subscribed doe resolue and 
ingage by the helpe of the Spirit of god to walke in al 
the wayes of god so far forth as he hath reuealled or 
shall reueall them on to us by his word and in all deuteys 


of Loue & wachfullnes each to others as become a 
Church of Christ. 


THE WooDBRIDGE COVENANT? 


The “Records” read concerning the organization of 
the church : 


It was in the year 1651 y* Several Serious Christians 
in and about Woodbridge in y® County of Suffolk were 
associated and framed into a Visible Church for Christ, 
according to the Congregational Way & Order, under 
the Direction & Oversight of y* Reverend M® Frederich 
Woodal ; and were Cemented by y® following Covenant, 
w T have met with in a Parchment Roll, thus drawn up. 


THE CHURCH COVENANT. 


The 18" day of y® Seaventh Month 1651. Septem- 
ber [evidently later inserted], 

1 We do profess before y* Lord, this day, that He is 
our God, whom we haue chosen, to whom we are joyned, 
upon whose Covenant we take hold for y* we want, to 
whom also we giue up our Selves according to that Cove- 
nant, and all y* we haue. 

2 We do, and will (in y° power of his Spirit) receive 


1 MS. “Copy of the Old Church Book” .. . as the preceding, p. 5. 

It seems that this covenant was that used at the final organization of the church 
in 1648. The preceding covenant of 1646 evidently was employed before the organi- 
zation had been completed. 


2 MS. “Copy | of the | Records | of the Congregational Church | worshipping at 
the | Quay Meeting | Woodbridge 1651-185sr. |”’ Transcribed by Joseph Davey. 
Pp. 1,2. In Doctor Williams’ Library, London, 


134 


~Tesus Christ our King, Priest & Prophet, depending upon 
him for Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification & Re- 
demption y‘ glorying we may glory in y*® Lord. 

3 We will, through Grace, Endeavour to Know y* 
Scriptures more fully, which onely are able to make us 
wise unto Salvation, that we may embrace all y® prom- 
ises, obey all y® precepts walk in all y° Ways laid out for 
us therein, being led by y® Spirit, and living, and walk- 
ing in Him. 

4 We freely and chearfully give up ourselves each to 
other to become one lump, & one stick in the Lord’s 
hand, and will (the Lord assisting us) submit our selves 
one to another in y°® fear of God ; watch over one another, 
and doing all things becoming those of the same Body, 
and whose Heart is one, & Way one in y® Lord. 

5 We will (the Lord helping us) Endeavour to keep 
Unity of y® Spirit in y® Bond of Peace, doing nothing 
through Strife or Vain glory, but following after things 
that make for Quiet, and things wherein one may Edify 
another. 

6 We will (in Power received from on high) hold fast 
what we haue received till y° Lord come, obeying our 
Governours, in Him, pleasing our Neighbours in Him, 
instructing our Children in the Knowledg of his Will, 
observing all the laws of his House, the Laws of y* Sab- 
bath, Prayer, Fasting, and Thanksgiving, hearing our 
great Prophet in all things, walking after Him, that we 
may give no Offense to Jew or Gentile, nor to y® Church 
of Christ ; but may Exercise our selves unto Godliness, 
which hath the Promise of this Life, and of that also 
which is to come. 


THE COCKERMOUTH COVENANT. 


October 2, 1651, the Congregational Church at Cock- 
ermouth was formed in the following manner :? 


1 Josiah Thompson’s “ Hist. of Dissenting Congregations.” Vol. I., Cumber- 
land, No. 5. 


135 


These seven after solemn Invocation of God & mutual 
Satisfaction in each other agreed in y® following Confes- 
sion & Engagement viz 

We poor Worms lost in Adam, being by y® Grace of 
God thro’ y® Spirit called to be Saints considering it to 
be our Duty to observe Gospel Ordinance for the future 
do agree togather to walk as a People whom y® Lord 
hath chosen into holy Communion of Saints and we do 
mutually promise to watch over one another in y® Lord 
& to do all such Things according to our best Light, that 
are required of a church in order, and to submit to our 
Lawful Officers that shall from Time to Time be chosen 
out from among us. and this in y® Presence of the Lord 
we resolve & promise hoping that of his Goodness & ac- 
cording to his wonted dealing with his People He will 
carry us on to his Praise 


THE BEccLes CovENAnT.' JuLy 6, 1652. 


This covenant must have been exceedingly simple for 
the church book begins with the following statement : 


The names of such persons whoe have covenanted 
togither to walke in y® wayes of Christ according to 
Gospell Order, w” an account of such matters as haue 
occurred in y® Church at Beccles. 

In y* day & yeare above written, these following p’sons 
joyned in covenant togither under y* visible Regiment of 
Christ, according to y® Gospell, vz. Joh. Clarke, James 
King, jun Rob’. Ottey, Edm. Nevill, Joh. Morse, Will”. 
Cutlove, Edm. Artis, Rob’. Horne, Joh. Botswaine. 


ORGANIZATION OF THE CHURCH IN 
GUESTWICK IN 1652.. 
The church in Guestwick may not have used a cove- 
nant at the time of its organization. At any rate, the 


1“ Brief Records | of the | Independent Church, | at | Beccles, Suffolk: | By 
| Samuel Wilton Rix.” | London, 1887. Pp. 111-113. Bodleian Library, Oxford. 


136 


‘account of the formation of the church is limited in 
Joseph Davey’s Copy of the Church Book! to a few 
words, to the effect that ‘The Church of Christ in and 
about Gestwick, sate down in Gospel! order in the latter 
end of the year 1652, and chose M* Richard Woorts 
for their pastour.” 

In 1695, however, a day was observed for “ renewal 
of their covenant,’ so that sometime before that date 
the church must have employed such a document. At 
this time a new covenant, which had been drawn up, 
was accepted by the church. This will be given in its 
chronological order. 


THE WATTISFIELD COVENANT.” 


Concerning the church in Wattisfield and its early 
covenant, Josiah Thompson says: 


The Account that is given there [z. ¢., in the remains of the 
Church Book] begins thus : 

‘The Church at [of ] Christ which at first set down at Weston 
the 14" of the 7 Month in the Year 1654 in the fellowship of the 
Gospel after the Congregational way & according to the profession 
of Faith & Order with the Church Covenant or agreemt before de- 
clared &c & began to revive & flourish under the Ministry of 
Mr". Benton for about 7 years last past at lenth by the good Provi- 
dence of God attained a Compleatment after they had renew’ d 
the Foundation Covenant a second setting down at Watesfield 
with M*. Wincop their Pastor.’’ This was done it seems by the 
Book May 2, 1678. 

It appears from the Profession of Faith & order referr’d to in the 
preceeding Paragraph that they were Persons who well understood 
the Principles of the Congregational Denomination particularly 


1 P.2. Doctor Williams’ Library. 

2In Josiah Thompson’s MS. ‘History of Protestant Dissenting Congrega- 
tions,’ written in 1772. Vol. IV. Suffolk. No. 23. Doctor Williams’ Library, 
London. 5 


137 


with respect to Liberty & Forbearance not so well understood at 
that time by some other Christians as they have been since. 

The form of Agreement is also much more simple than some 
others I have seen. It is in these words : 


We do covenant or agree in the Presence of God thro’ the As- 
sistance of His Holy Spirit to walk together in all the Ordinances 
of the Lord Iesus so far as the same are made clear unto us en- 
deavouring the advancement of the Glory of our Father the sub- 
jection of our Will to the Will of our Redeemer and the mutual 
Edification of each other in his most Holy Faith & Fear. 


Besides these early covenants may also be mentioned 
those of the churches in Bassingtown, Rowel, and at 
Keysoe, of the dates 1655, 1656, and 1657, etc. 


THE BASSINGTOWN COVENANT. ! 
DATE ABOUT 1655. 


Josiah Thompson says concerning the organization of 
the church in Bassingtown : 


The first members of this Church were embodied and all others 
afterward admitted on a profession of Repentance toward God, 
and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ and the following covenant 
was read and subscribed by all the members standing : 


We do in the presence of the Lord Jesus the awful crowned 
King of Sion and in the presence of his holy angels and people, 
and all beside here present Solemnly give up ourselves to the 
Lord and to one another by the will of God, solemnly promising 
& engaging in the aforesaid presence to walk with the Lord, and 
with one another in the observation of all Gospel Ordinances and 
the discharge of all relative duties in this Church of God, & 
Elsewhere as the Lord shall enlighten and enable us. 

Subscribed by ABC D &c. 


Thus the Church was first embodied. When a Member was 
afterward received the Pastor-used to say—Brother (or Sister) If 
you now in the presence of the Lord Jesus, the awful Crowned 


1MS. “History of Protestant Dissenting Congregations.” 1772. Josiah 
Thompson, Vol. I. Cambridgeshire, 


138 

’ King of Sion &c do now solemnly give up yourself &c (mutatis 
mutandis) signify it by lifting up your right hand to the Lord, 
and then on the part of the Church the person admitting liffting 
up his Right hand said, We likewise in the aforesaid awful 
presence do receive you into our Communion solemnly promising 
and engaging to carry it towards you as becomes a Church of 
Christ, watching over you in the Lord as he shall enable us and 
in Testimony thereof to give you the right hand of Fellowship. 


THE ROWELL COVENANT.! 


Concerning the formation of the church in Rowel 
Thomas Coleman says: 


In the year 1655, those who had been converted under his 
[Mr. Beverly's] ministry became united together in the fellow- 
ship of the Gospel as a Christian society. A Church covenant 
was drawn up, and signed by every member. This being the 
earliest of the kind that we have discovered among the North- 
amptonshire Churches, it may not be unsuitable to give it a 
place in these memorials. 


A COVENANT RENEWED AND SUBSCRIBED BY THE 
REFORMED CHURCH AT ROWELL. 


Whereas, being by nature enemies to God and aliens from his 
covenant of mercy, hateful and hating one another, it pleased 
God of his free grace to admit us into covenant privileges by bap- 
tism, wherein we engaged, and whereby we were bound, to walk 
as new creatures adopted and redeemed, wholly attending to his 
blessed will revealed in the Gospel, we do now, with shame and 
loathing of ourselves, most solemnly acknowledge to his glory 
that we have most abominably corrupted ourselves, his worship, 
and the holy covenant of our peace, to the blemish of our holy 
profession, the scandalizing of many, the grief of God’s Holy 
Spirit and people, and now, through mercy, to the grief of our 
own spirits ; so that we abhor ourselves for all our former ignorant 
and disorderly walking. And seeing how God hath called upon 
us by his word and Spirit to lay hold yet again of his covenant, 
so in a proper season of reformation—seeing he is pleased to con- 
tinue the proposal of such an unworthy people to himself, lo! 


1 See Thomas Coleman’s “ Memorials of the Independent Churches in North- 
amptonshire,’’ London, 1853. Pp. 47, 48. 


139 


how can we be ashamed of his truth and Gospel? We do, therefore, 
humbly tender ourselves to Jesus Christ and his ministry, in this re- 
newed profession and covenant subscribed—viz., that, through the 
grace of God, we will constantly maintain and walk according to 
the whole will of God revealed in the Scriptures, and comprised in 
the articles above mentioned ; professing them against all error, 
heresy, and profaneness, in due order, as members of this one par- 
ticular Church, for enjoyment of all Christ's ordinances, perform- 
ance of all members’ duties, in subjection to our pastors, ruling 
officers, and to each other in the Lord ; holding due communion 
with all other reformed Churches of Christ in the world, that so we 
may be built up in knowledge and holiness, better to maintain our 
obedience to Christ, the common interest of the saints, and so more 
please and glorify God. Accordingly attest to remember his cov- 
enant and us, in the approaching day of our blessed Lord and 
Saviour Jesus Christ, to whom be all glory for ever. Amen. 
Anno Domini 1655. 

(Signed) John Beverly, etc., etc. 


THE Keysor Covenant’ oF [1657?]. 


We whose names are hereunder written having found 
by sad experience how uncomfortable itt is to walke 
in a dissordered unsettled condition, and having a de- 
sire to take off all the ordinances of god which are 
made known unto us out off his word: doe therefore 
this day give up o” selves to the lord and to the word of 
his grace to be guided governed and directed by him in 
all his wayes : And we doe likewise promise in the pres- 
ence off the lord to walk with our brethren and sisters 
in this Congregation with all watchffullness and tender- 
ness avoiding all Jealousies, Suspitions, back bitings and 
Censurings and to have speciall regard to that rule of 
the lord Jesus to bear and forbear to give and forgive 
one another as he himself hath taught us and we doe 
likewise desire to obey god in all his Comands and to 
give no offence to the Jew nor Gentile nor to the church 
of God as much as in us lyeth. 


1MS. History in five vols., entitled “Some Account of the Nonconformist 
Churches at Hail Weston & St Neots in the County of Huntington—In five vol- 
umes—Compiled from Church Books and other authentic documents—By Joseph 
Rix F.L.s.”’ etc, “ MDCCCLV.” Vol. I., p. 26. Doctor Williams’ Library, London, 


140 


Scarcely more than half a dozen members consti- 
tuted the church who signed this covenant—the first 
autograph being that of “Jo: Donne Pastor.” 


A LATER AND UNDATED COVENANT OF THE 
KEYSOE CHURCH.! 


Wee the Bretheren of the Church of Christ in and 
about Keston being sensable in som mesuer of the 
neclect of our duty and unnfaithfullness to Christ in our 
not walking with him in his blessed ordinances and espe- 
tially that of lord’s super and allso finding our deare 
Bretheren and Sisters goeing som one way and som 
another and seeing our soules disapointed at present in 
that which we so much desiered and longed after that 
was the gathering the wholl into one againe we thought 
it therefore our immediate duty without furder delay to 
fall into the practticale part of those holy things of god 
that we in the wholl walked so long together in and 
therefore in order to our enjoyment of those glorious 
ordinances of Jesus Christ we have met together and 
hav in the feare of god Renued our Covenant and doe 
resolve y® lord helping of us to put ourselves into an 
orderly way for the enjoying those ordynances of Christ 
that we have met with much of god in. 


We now have seen that after 1640 Independent 
churches in England were frequently organized, and that 
a church covenant almost invariably was employed at 
their formation. These covenant documents were all 
very informal in expression, some being short and sim- 
ple, others drafted by those who had come directly or 
indirectly under the influence of Hugh Peter, being with- 
out exception somewhat extended and explicit. 


1 «Some Account of the Nonconformist Churches.” . . Vol. I., p. 82. Doctor 
Williams’ Library, London. This covenant was drawn up probably toward the 
close of the seventeenth century. 


141 


The two following covenants, though drawn up as 
late as the beginning of the eighteenth century, are ex- 
tremely simple : 


CHURCH COVENANT OF THE PARTICULAR CHURCH OF 
Curist. CastTLeE Hiyt, NorTHAMPTON. 
DATE, ABOUT 1695. 


We, this Church of Christ, whose names are under- 
written, having given up ourselves to the Lord and one 
to another according to the will of God, do promise and 
covenant, in the presence of God, to walk together in all 
the laws and ordinances of Christ, according to the rules 
of his Gospel through Jesus Christ so strengthening us. 


COVENANT OF THE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH OF 
Curist aT NorTHAMpTON,? “ PLANTED 
ONS OICT AY 27216090" 


The Church Covenant. 


Wee the Members of this Church of God whose 
Names are all inserted in this Book ; Do solemnly prom- 
ise in the presence of God and his holy Angells, and 
also in the pre-sence of each other, to walk together in 
the per-formance of all Gospel-Ordinances, and in the 
practice and discharge of all Relitive Duties as the Lord 
shall please to enable us. And whereas we differ in our 
Iudgements about Water Baptism, We do now Solemnly 
declare, That we that are for Infant: Bap-tism do not 
hereby, nor will not impose on the C of any of our 
Brethren or Sisters that are among [us that] are for Bap- 
tism upon Profession of Faith. s...° * hand, We that are 
for believers Baptism do not nor will not impose on the 
Consciences of any of our Brethren or Sisters that are 


1 Thomas Coleman’s “ Memorials of the Independent Churches.” 

? Copy of original Records of the Congregational Church of Christ at Northamp- 
ton, P.2. Formerly in possession of Taylor & Son, Northampton. 

8 Word wholly or partly illegible. 


142 


‘amongst us, that are for Infant Baptis . . .' : Nor will 
we .. .' Party, or any of us) impose upon any that 
hereafter ma. . .! yn in Communion with us: But do 


all promise (freely & cordially, without casting Retlec- 
tions, &c. on the Persons or Practice of any) to leave 
every one to his or her Liberty of Iudgment & Practice 
herein: Each . . .' walking Conscientiously up to our 
Light; Engaging & Endeavouring in the Strength of 
Christ that our difference in Iudgement shall not cause 
Breach of Union or Affection. 


Just about the time that these last two simple cove- 
nants were used the Guestwick covenant was drawn up. 
It is an extended and very explicit covenant, consisting 
of a long introduction and twelve specific divisions. It 
reads as follows : 


Ture GUESTWICK COVENANT OF 1695.” 


The Church Book says concerning this covenant -— 
«“y® 13 of June [16]95 was kept as a solemn day in 
order to y® Church’s renewall of their covenant with y’ 
Lord and one another, for y® quickning and stirring to 
w duty Mr. Mills preach’d a sermon from y* 2 of 
Chron. y® 29% and y® 1o™ v: after which y® following 
covenant drawn up by him, was read and engaged to.” 


Our Covenant and solemn Engagement. 


We (who are here present before y* Lord, a poor 
Church of Jesus Christ, in whom God hath called us to 
y° Knowledge of himself, and thereby to y° faith, order, 


1 Word wholly or partly illegible. 


2MS. ‘Copy of | ‘A | ‘Register or Church Book. | ‘Containing y® most mate- 
riall matters | ‘transacted in ye Chuf¢h of Christ | ‘walking in ye faith and fellow- 
ship of ye | ‘Gospel in & about | ‘Guestwick.’ | 1652 to 1850 | Transcribed from the 
original, borrowed | of the Rev4 Robert Drane | Pastor of that Church | by Joseph 
Davey | 1850.”’ | Pp. 9-11. Doctor Williams’ Library, London. 


143 


and fellowship of y® Gospel, having given our selves to 
y° Lord, and to one another, by y® will of God) do 
humbly adknowledg y* we are less than y® least of all his 
mercys, and have not walk’d worthy of our holy profes- 
sion, and heavenly calling, but have fallen under mani- 
fold decays in faith, love, and obedience to y° dishonour 
of Christ, greif of y® spirit, stumbling of others, and 
disquietment of our own consciences ; wherefore (con- 
sidering y® call of God to us in his word and providences) 
we do here humbly, and solemnly engage our selves 
unto him, promising, in his strength y* we will for y° 
future constantly adhere to him, and cleave to him as 
our God in Christ, and will endeavour (by y’® aids of his 
grace, and supplys of his spirit) to walk more humbly, 
holily, and fruitfully before him ; and w™ all diligence to 
observe, and do y° things which our Lord Jesus hath 
commanded us; as, 

1 of all y* we will unfeignedly endeavour to depart 
from all sin and evill, which either is, or shall be made 
known to us from y*® word of God, y® 1 of y® Thessa- 
lonians y® 5° and y° 22: | 

2 y‘ we will as much as in us lyes, frequent y*® solemn 
assemblys & attend upon y*® ministry of Christ in y*® 
Church, and y° ordinances of his house therein adminis- 
tred, allthough our coming at them may be through 
many hazards and difficultys. 

3 y’ we will constantly attend unto y® discharge of 
those particular dutys which are encumbent on us in y® 
severall places, and capacitys in which we do (or may) 
stand to each other in y® Church, whither as officers, or 
private particular members. 

4 y* we will carefully watch over one another as much 
as in us lyes, not suffer sin to rest upon each other, y* 
we will both patiently take, and meekly give reproof in 
love, when it’s just and necessary. 

5. y’ in case of private offence we will observe and 
walk by y® rule of y® Lord Jesus, y* 18 of Matthew, y® 
15", telling it to our brother firstly, and secretly, as being 


144 


tender of his name, avoiding and forbearing sinfull whis- 
perings and backbitings. 

6 y’ we will be tender of y* peace and prosperity of 
y° Church, carefully avoiding those things or courses y' 
have a tendancy to y® breaking of it’s unity, and making 
divisions amongst us. 

7 y’ we will seriously attend more strict observation 
of y® Lord’s day with a more diligent and constant 
attendance of y* worship of God in our familys, together 
with those relative dutys w are encumbent on us in y’® 
severall relations wherein we stand. 

8 y* we will humbly and meekly submit unto all y® ap- 
pointments and institutions of Jesus Christ in y® Church. 

9 y‘ we will endeavour all our days to walk in love 
and peace with one another, if God shall give or con- 
tinue opportunitys so to do. 

IO y’ as we are separate from, and do renounce, so 
we will not hold communion with y® world in their way 
of worship, but cleave unto y® pure institutions of Jesus 
Christ ; whatever tryals or persecutions we may meet 
with for so doing. 

11 y' we will endeavour in y*® general course of our 
conversations so to walk as not to lay stumbling blocks 
before sinners to harden them in their sins, and preju- 
dice them against y* ways of Christ ; but y* we and ours 
as much as in us lyes will so walk and carry it y* we may 
not give any just offence either to jew and gentile, or y® 
Church of Christ. 

12 and Lastly, in testimony of our sincere purpose, res- 
olution, and promise herein, we do solemnly lift up our 
hands to God in y® heav’ns, taking hold of his covenant 
and promise in Christ for our help and stability herein. 


There was a strong tendency in England during the 
eighteenth century to use more extended covenants than 
those employed by the early Independents. In 1721 a 
covenant covering twenty-five printed pages was pub- 


145 


lished in London under the title “The | Covenant | To 
be the | Lord's People, | And to | Walk after the Lord ‘ 
| Signed by the | Church of Christ, | Under the Pastoral 
Care of | Joseph Jacob, | A Servant of | Christ Crucify’d.” 
It is needless to say that such a covenant would never 
become popular, and is too long to be quoted. 

During the eighteenth century, however, short, simple 
covenants often continued to be used by the Independ- 
ent churches in England, and even by the middle of the 
century evidently there were people of certain districts 
who were not acquainted with the method of organiz- 
ing a church by covenant, for when in 1744 the church 
at Milburn Port, composed of Dissenters, which had had 
pastors of different denominations, was re-organized on 
the covenant plan, it is said in Josiah Thompson’s account 
to have been “formed on a Model entirely new at least 
as to this Neighbourhood.” 


THe MILpurn Port Covenant. 


Mr. Thompson says! concerning the organization of 
the church in Milburn Port : 


About y® Beginning of the Year 1743 M'Geo Lewis Young a 
Member of the Church at Horsly-Down Hants accepted of an Invi- 
tation to take y* Care of the Church of Milbourne-Port ; & was or- 
dained there y° Same Year. Mr? Young had his Education at y* 
Academy, which is Supported by y® Kings Head Society in Lon- 
don and in the Year 1744 the Church now under his Care was 
formed on a Model entirely new at least as to this Neighbourhood. 
Agreeable to this They are Said 40 give up themselves to y° Lord, 
&»~ to one another in a Church Way, by subscribing what is called 
a Covenant, which consists of a Declaration of their Belief of 


1JIn Josiah Thompson’s MS. “ Hist. of Protestant Dissenting Congregations,” 
1772. Vol. IV. Somersetshire, No. 25, Milburn Port. 
K 


146 


some particular Doctrines, and thetr Solemn Profession of a de- 
vout Acknowledgment of God as their God & of their Surrender 
of themselves to Him & to one another according to his Will, and 
his Church & People. 

And tho this Form was not so universally acceptable as to be 
immediately Subscribed by all of them, yet all who had been ad- 
mitted as Members of y® Church acquiesced in it so far as to con- 
tinue in Communion with them. 


In 1748 the following comparatively explicit and ex- 
pressive covenant was drawn up on the formation of a 


church in Southwold, Suffolk. 


THE SOUTHWOLD COVENANT. 


The record? says concerning the organization of the 
Southwold church : 


This Church was first formed on Tuesday, October 11, 1748, 
by the Reverend George Wiggett, who was chosen pastor, and 
who, with ten others, entered into covenant as follows : 


CHURCH COVENANT. 


The articeles upon which we, as a Christian Church, we whose 
names are here under written, promise a mutual agreement with 
each other, appearing to us agreeable to Scripture, and necessary 
to preserve us from error and impiety, and yet tending to secure 
the Catholic Church, which every Church of Christ should be 
governed by are as follows, viz. : 

1st That the persons who shall first consent to join with each 
other in church fellowship, shall mutually declare their satisfaction 
in each other as to their sincerity in the profession of Christianity. 

2™4 That whoever shall after that desire to join themselves to 
us shall give an account of their competency in the Knowledge of 
Christianity to their pastor, and of their sober life and conversa- 
tion to him and the rest of the Church. But 

3" The manner of doing it shall be left indifferent, whether 
by Solemn profession made by themselves in writing, or by word 
of mouth, or by the testimony of credible persons best acquainted 
with them. If they choose:to declare themselves they shall have 


1 See Harmer MS., No. 9, “‘Nonconformity in Suffolk.” Pp. 110, 111. Dr. Wil- 
liams’ Library, London. 


147 


liberty, but still the testimony of others shall be joined with them. 
- If through bashfulness or any other cause they are averse to this 
method, provided their conversation shall be well attested they 
shall be received notwithstanding. 

4" If any admitted be guilty of sins inconsistent with a 
profession of Christianity they shall be admonished, reproved, 
suspended, or excluded from the Communion of the Church 
according as the nature of the crime shall be. 

5" That upon a sincere repentance, well evidenced, they shall 
be restored or taken into the Church again. 

Lastly, That in all matters of controversy we will be determined 
by the sole authority of the Bible, and wherein we are at a loss, 
we will call in the assistance of other parties for their advice and 
direction. 

THE MarrisHaLty Covenant. 


In the formation of the church at Mattishall in Nor- 
folk, in 1772, also, a short, simple covenant was used. 
Concerning the organization of the church Josiah 
Thompson ! says : 


Accordingly the Rev’, M* Iohn Carter was solemnly ordained 
at Mattishall, Sep" 30, 1772, their first pastor, the Church consist- 
ing then of Eight other Men, who had solemnly embodied them- 
selves together as a Church of Christ. Which will appear by 
reciting a paper read publickly at the beginning of the Transac- 
tions of the said 30", Sept’. . . ‘“we therefore by the kind Assist- 
ance of some Friends, endeavor’d to provide this place for the 
Dispensation of the Gospel amongst us, in a Way & Manner wch 
we apprehend to be agreeable to the Scriptures, and in order 
thereto (uniting ourselves together after the following Manner) we 
unitedly proposed to solicit the Assistance of the Rev’ Mr. John 
Carter in the Work of the Ministry, & having had Trial of his 
Gifts for near 15 Months, we unitedly join in one Invitation (hav- 
ing previously to this, form’d ourselves into a Church) to call him 
to the exercise of the pastoral Office among us. 

‘‘We whose names are hereunto subscribed acknowledging the 
great Goodness of God to us, who we trust has called us out of 
Darkness into his marvellous Light, and translated us from the 
Power of Satan into the Kingdom of his dear Son, do by this 
solemnly profess our intention of giving up ourselves to the Lord, 
& to one another, according to the Will of God, stedfastly pur- 
posing to walk together in the Observance of all the Ordinances 


1“ History of Protestant Dissenting Congregations.” 1772, Vol. 1V. Norfolk, No. 10. 


148 


of Christ, & we do hereby as in the sight of God solemnly profess 

that it is our avowed Design, sincere Intention, and hearty desire, 

to seek each others spiritual Welfare & the Glory of God, and to this 

end we purpose & promise to watch over each other with a Chris- 

tian Spirit of Love & Tenderness &c. This we purpose, this we 

profess in the Strength of the Lord, So help us Our God! Amen,” 
Signed by Eight Men. 


These documents which have been quoted give us a 
sufficient idea of the development of the covenant 
among the English Congregationalists. It was for two 
centuries constantly used in the organizing of their 
churches. Though often simple in the earlier years of 
their history, it became more and more extended as the 
denomination grew, until in one or two instances it 
passed in extent all bounds of good judgment. English 
Congregationalists of the present day seldom, if ever, 
make use of the covenant idea, yet there were probably 
occasional instances during the nineteenth century when 
English Congregational churches were formed by use of 
a covenant.! This, however, was exceptional. As to 
the cause of the decline in the use of the covenant idea 
among English Congregationalists, also as to the period 
when the decline is first to be observed, Principal George 
P. Gould, of Regent’s Park College, London, says a 
“My impression is that these Covenants fell into neglect 
during the time of spiritual decline in the eighteenth 
century, and that they were not restored to their former 
position when the churches themselves revived.” This 
seems to state the case exactly. 


1 Principal George P. Gould, Regent’s Park College, London, says, in a letter to 
the author, that he has heard of one case of an English Congregational church being 
organized by use of a covenant in Cambridgeshire as recently as 1815. But he says 
also: ‘‘Here and there possibly similar instances might be forthcoming, but their 
rarity is in striking contrast to the prevalent practice of the seventeenth century.” 


2In the letter to which reference is made in the preceding note. 


+ 


149 


THE Covenant Amonc EncGuisu Baptists 
SINCE 1640. 


We may now pass to a study of the deveiopment of 
the covenant in English Baptist churches, First it may 
be remarked, however, that Baptists do not appear to 
have been so careful as the Congregationalists in making 
records and preserving them, and, further, so many Bap- 
tists remained in congregations composed of Congrega- 
tionalists and Baptists, or sometimes at least made so 
little distinction, when separate, between their churches 
and those of the Congregationalists, that it is often ex- 
tremely difficult to obtain satisfactory answers to the 
questions that arise concerning the earlier English Bap- 
tists. Fortunately, however, a sufficient number of early 
Baptist records have been preserved to show that Eng- 
lish Baptist churches never have entirely been agreed 
on the propriety of using a church covenant. Many 
churches, however, have made use of the covenant 
idea, as is shown by the following Baptist covenant doc- 
uments and references to the use of the covenant idea 
among Baptists. 

Adam Taylor, in speaking of the manner of organiz- 
ing General Baptist churches during the seventeenth 
century, has the following remark :! 


When a number of persons, thus qualified, had agreed to unite 
and maintain the interest of their Saviour, they set apart a day 
for fasting and prayer ; when, after solemnly devoting themselves 
to the service of God, they gave to each other the right hand of 
fellowship ; and generally! subscribed their names to a mutual 


1 “ History of the English General Baptists,” London, 1818, Part 1., p. 411. The 
above statement concerning the general use of a covenant among the early General 
Baptists is apparently too strong. The author would substitute the word “some- 
times” or “ often” for generally.” 


150 


“covenant, containing a few rules by which they proposed to con- 
duct themselves as members of the same society. 


In the Epistle “To the Christian Reader”? of Thomas 
Wynell’s book entitled “THE | COVENANTS | Plea 
for | INFANTS”: |... . Oxford, 1642, occurs the fol- 
lowing passage,’ which suggests the close relation that 
early existed between Congregationalists and Baptists, 
and the way in which Baptist churches sometimes came 
to employ church covenants : 


There were nere unto my dwelling a company of the Separation, 
who undertooke [about 1641] to erect a Church by entring into 
a Covenant, and these carried on their resolutions hand-smooth, 
untill they were grown into a great faction. And (as it is the 
property of that Schisme to speake at randome) they began to let 
flie against the Church assemblies of England, as false, Antichris- 
tian, and out of Gods way. 

VVhereupon I began to enquire into the nature of their Cove- 
nant, and told them, that if it were a Covenant of first entrance 
into the true visible Church of Christ, then of necessity the par- 
ties so entring must have the seale of first entrance imprinted 
upon them, which (under the Gospell) is Baptisme. . . Thus (by 
way of arguing) I spake unto diverse of them, which did so puzzle 
them, that not long after some of them fell upon the practice of 
sealing their covenant by Baptisme, renouncing their Baptisme in 
their infancy, as a nullity and an Idoll. and being demanded by the 
Magistrates of the City of Gloucester (before whom they were con- 
vented) who it was that advised them into this practice, they nom- 
inated mee to be the first that put them upon it: whereas I was so 
farre from it, that I held that the dangerous Covenant of the Sepa- 
ration would necessarily lead unto this. . . But he [‘« Walter Coles 
of Painsewicke a Taylor’’ ] goes further, and turnes plaine Anabap- 
tist. And so making a journey to London hee brings downe one 
Thomas Lambe a chandler (as is reported) and one Clem: Writer a 


1 Pp. viii.-x. 


161 


Factor in Blackwell-hall London (both Anabaptists) into this Coun- 
trey. And I being in London, these two travellors (by Walter Coles 
his directions) came on the Lords-day to Cranham (where I did and 
doe serve in the worke of the Ministery) and there the said Lamb 
(being in a grey-suit) offers to preach in publike, but being disap- 
pointed by Gods good providence of his wicked purpose, he retires 
to a private house in Cranham abovesaid, and by Preaching there 
he subverted many. And shortly after in an extreame cold, and 
frosty time, in the night season, diverse men and women were re- 
baptized in the great river of Severne in the City of Gloucester. 


THE COVENANT OF THE BROADMEAD BAPTIST 
CuHurcH, BRISTOL, 1640. 


The first Baptist covenant of which the text has been 
preserved is probably that of ‘‘a Church of Christ meet- 
ing in Broadmead, Bristol.”” The records’ of this church 
say that those who desired to form the church were 
“strengthened” “ with fear and holy trembling, to take 
up holy resolutions to follow the Lord ; giving up them- 
selves to him to walk before him all the days of their 
lives in his ways, and joining together, in the fear of the 
Lord, to separate from the worship of the times.”’ 


Anno 1640. 


“And thus the Lord led them by his Spirit in a 
way and path that they knew not, having called them 
out of darkness into jas marvelous light by Jesus Christ 
our Lord.” 

In 1640 five persons met, and “with godly purpose 
of heart [they] joined themselves together in the Lord ; 
only thus covenanting, That they would, in the strength 
and assistance of the Lord, come forth of the world, and 


1 «The Records of a Church of Christ Meeting in Broadmead, Bristol, 1640-1687.” 
Hanserd Knollys Society. London. 1847. P. 17. 


152 


worship the Lord more purely, persevering therein to 
their end.” 

An “implicite” covenant, or rather informal agree- 
ment, evidently was used by those Baptists who separated 
in 1641 from Mr. Jessey’s church in London. This 
covenant was ‘“ manifested,” not made with any set form 
of expression, for some scrupled at the word ‘“cove- 
nant,” but all testified “by mutual desires and agree- 
ment” that they would organize a church together. The 
record says :* “Those Persons y* ware persuaded Bap- 
tism should be by dipping y® Body had mett in two Com- 
panies, & did intend so to meet after this, all these 
agreed to proceed alike togeather. And then Mani- 
festing (not by any formal Words a Covenant) w* word 
was scrupled by some of them, but by mutual desires 
& agreement each Testified: Those two Companyes did 
set apart one to Baptize the rest; So it was solemnly 
performed by them.” 


THE BROADMEAD BrIsToL COVENANT 
OF 1645. 


The next Baptist covenant of importance is the 
strictly Separatist renewed Broadmead covenant of 1645. 
The SGRecords 7 read 


Anno 1645. 


And being thus, as it were, in a chaos of confusion, by reason 
of those several that did not cleave to their former received 
principles, . . [they] began again to new model themselves, and 
to separate from these disturbers;.. Thus having taken the 

1In the Gould MS., No. 2, entitled «© An Old MSS, giveing some Acco of those 


Baptists who first formed themselves into distinct Congregations, or Churches in 
London. found among certain Paper given me by Mr Adams,” 


2 Pp. 31, 32. 


153 


names of such that again gave up themselves to the duties and 
privileges of such that were called to be saints, they entered into 
a covenant that was very briefly written in a paper, and read unto 
them, to this effect—‘‘ That they would, in the strength of Christ, 
keep close to the holy scriptures, the Word of God ; and [to] the 
plain truths and ordinances of the gospel, of church fellowship, 
breaking bread, and prayers ; and to [be] subject to one another, 
according to the discipline and admonition [commanded] by the 
rules of Christ, in the New Testament, or the scriptures.’’ 

And so having now by a new embodying of themselves again, 
and, as it were, renewing their covenant with God, and [with ] 
one another, they went on in the ways of the Lord. 


Baptist churches were founded at an early date in 
Fenstanton and Warboys, but their records give no evi- 
dence of the use of covenants in these churches, at least 
at any early period. When, however, some years later, 
the Baptist church in Hexham was organized, on the 
“21st day of the 5th month,” 1652, a covenant certainly 
was used, as is shown by the phraseology of the follow- 
ing entries in the “Records” : 


THE CHURCH OF CHRIST IN HEXHAM. 


Thomas Tillam, minister, and a messenger of one of seven 
churches in London, did administer the holy ordinance of bap- 
tiem, in the nameé «. . to. . . 

These, solemnly giving up themselves to the Lord and one to 
another, to walk in communion together, with submission to all 
ordinances of the gospel, I, Tho. Tillam, espoused to one husband; 
hoping that I shall present them a chaste virgin to Christ, with all 
that in sincerity of heart, have (through the mighty power of God), 
or shall be, joined to them.! . 

The names of our members who are remaining, and [who] 
entered into a covenant to be the Lord’s, are? :— 


1 Records of the Churches of Christ,” gathered at Fenstanton, Warboys, and 
Hexham. 1644-1770. London, 1854. Hanserd Knollys Society. Pp. 289, 290. 


2 P. 299. 


154 


The Baptist Church in Leominster,’ Herefordshire, also 
evidently was organized by a very informal covenant, for 
the Church Book begins with the following Minute, viz: 


The 25" of the 7" Month 1656 The Church of Christ meeting 
at Brother Ioseph Patshalls House in Leominster was Constituted 
& the Persons undernamed did after Solemn Seeking of God by 
Prayer, give up themselves to the Lord, & to each other to Walk 
together in all the Ordinances of Iesus Christ according to his 
appointments, which was done in the presence of our Brother 
Daniell King & other Brethren. 


In the Gould MS.’ is given the substance of the follow- 
ing Baptist covenant of the date 1656. 


THE LoONGWORTH BAPTIST COVENANT. 


The account of the organization of the Longworth 
church reads in part: 


At A meeting y® 12" of ye 10" month 1656, when the Church 
at Longworth did first stand upp as a Church of Christ distinct 
from Abingdon Church. 

That those members in & neare Longworth togather with our 
Brother Combes being still pswaded twill most tend to the Glory of 
God that wee stand upp as a distinct Church of Christ o' Bro: 
Combes being to walke with us so long as himself shall be pswaded 
that his call from y*® Lord is to be amongst us to be at present upon 
triall to see how y® Lord will owne his labour amongst us. 

This being Resolved upon by us whose names are under- 
written doe in the presence of the Lord give upp ourselves to 
y® Lord and to each other to walke togather as members of a 
Church of Christ watching’ over each other for good to walke in 
all the ordinances of Christ as the Lord shall give us Light, 
strength and opptunity. 


1 See Josiah Thompson’s “ Hist. of Protestant Dissenting Congregations,” 1772. 
Vol. IJ., Herefordshire. No. 4, Leominster. 


2 Next to the last section in the volume, unnumbered. 


THE COVENANT OF THE CHURCH AT HITCHIN. 


The covenant of the Baptist church at Hitchin, re- 
newed Oct. 25, 1681, and probably employed at the or- 
ganization of the church about 1660, has been preserved ! 
by the Rev. Joseph Ivimey in the following words: 


It appears to have been common for the churches then, as with 
some at present [czvca 1814], to have covenants, to which every 
person subscribed as the condition of membership. This was the 
case with this church, as we are informed that on October 25, 
1681, ‘‘The church being met together at Hitchin, at brother 
Thomas Field’s house, and so fully that very few were absent, did 
then renew their covenant to the Lord, and one to another, with 
fasting and prayer, not contradicting, but by silence and lifting up 
their hands declared their freeness and heartiness therein.’’ 

The Covenant ts as followeth and thus propounded : 


We who through the mercy of God, and our Lord Jesus Christ, 
have obtained grace to give ourselves to the Lord, and one to an- 
other by the will of God to have communion one with another as 
saints in our gospel fellowship. Do, before God our Father, and 
the Lord Jesus Christ, and the holy angels, agree and promise, all 
of us (the Lord assisting) to walk together in this our gospel com- 
munion and fellowship, as a church of Jesus Christ in love to the 
Lord, and one to another, and endeavor to yield sincere and 
hearty obedience to the laws, ordinances and appointments of our 
Lord and Lawgiver in his church. 

And also do agree and promise (the Lord assisting) to follow 
after the things which make for peace, and things whereby the 
one may edify another : that so loving and walking together in 
peace, the God of Love and Peace may be with us. Amen. 

To which we had the universal consent and Amen of all. 


The Records of the Baptist church in Kettering in- 
dicate that it was organized by use of about the simplest 
covenant possible. For in some manuscript, ‘‘ Extracts 

| from | The Church Book | Belonging to | The 
Baptist Church at Kettering,” copied for Taylor and 


1“ A History of the English Baptists,”” London, 1811-1830, 4 vols. Vol. II., pp. 195, 196. 


156 


‘Son, Northampton, in September, 1871, the first entry 
reads simply : 

‘““An Account off the names off those who are in the 
church ffellowsship att Kettering & haue ingaged to walk 
together according to the rules off the gospell under the 
ministry off M*. Maydwell pastour there Kittering.”’ 

That the covenant idea, however, gained favor in this 
church may be seen from the fact that later in the 
Church Book? the text of a very long undated covenant 
is given; a few pages farther on? is an abstract of this 
last covenant, dated Dec. 15, 1723 ; and just beyond? is 
a short covenant of eight or ten lines, dated “5 of no- 
vember 1729.” 

It seems probable that the Particular Baptists in Eng- 
land favored the use of a church covenant more than 
the General Baptists, but formal covenants were evidently 
not general among English Baptists as a whole at any 
time. The covenant * employed at the constitution of the 
Particular Baptist church at Horsley-down, of which Ben- 
jamin Keach later became pastor, according to his “Short 
Confession of Faith’’ of 1697, was the following : 


The Solemn Covenant of 
the Church at its Consti- 
tution. 

WE who desire to walk together in the Fear of the 
Lord, do, through the Assistance of his Holy Spirit, pro- 
fess our deep and serious Humiliation for all our Trans- 
gressions. And we do also solemnly, in the Presence of 


1 Pp. 31 plus. 2 Pp. 35 plus. 3 P. 39 plus. 

4« A Short Confession of Faith, Containing the Substance Of all the Funda- 
mental Articles In The Larger Confession, put forth by the Elders of the Baptized 
churches, Owning Personal Election and Final Perseverance.”’ London. 1697. [This 
was the Confession of the Baptist Church at Horsley-down.] Pp. 71-74. Principal 
Gould’s Private Collection. Regent’s Park College. 


157 


God, of each other, in the Sense of our own Vnworthi- 
ness, give up our selves to the Lord, in a Church state 
according to the Apostolical Constitution that he may be 
our sod, and we may be his People, through the Ever- 
lasting Covenant of his Free grace, in which alone we 
hope to be accepted by him, through his blessed Son 
Jesus Christ, whom we take to be our High Priest, to 
justify and sanctify us, and our Prophet to teach us; and 
to [be] subject to him as our Law-giver, and the King of 
Saints ; and to conform to all his Holy Laws and Ordi- 
nances, for our growth, Establishment, and Consolation ; 
that we may be as a Holy Spouse unto him, and serve 
him in our Generation, and wait for his second Appear- 
ance, as our glorious Bridegroom. 

Being fully satisfied in the way of Church-Communion, 
and the Truth of Grace in some good measure upon one 
anothers Spirits, we do solemnly join our selves together 
in a Holy Vnion and Fellowship, humbly submitting to 
the Discipline of the Gospel, and all Holy Duties re- 
quired of a People in such a spiritual Relation. 

1. We do promise and ingage to walk in all Holiness, 
Godliness, Humility, and Brotherly Love, as much as in 
us lieth to render our Communion delightful to God, 
comfortable to our selves, and lovely to the rest of the 
Lord’s People. 

2. We do promise to watch over each others Conver- 
sations, and not to suffer Sin upon one another, so far as 
God shall discover it to us, or any of us; and to stir up 
one another to Love and good Works; to warn, rebuke, 
and admonish one another with Meekness, according to 
the Rules left to us of Christ in that Behalf. 

3. We do promise in an especial manner to pray for 
one another, and for the Glory and Increase of this 
Church, and for the Presence of God in it, and the pour- 
ing forth of his Spirit on it, and his Protection over it to 
his Glory. 

4. We do promise to bear one anothers Burdens, to 
cleave to one another, and to have a Fellow-feeling with 


158 
one another, in all Conditions both outward and inward, 
as God in his Providence shall cast any of us into 

5. We do promise to bear with one anothers Weak- 
ness, Failings, and Infirmities, with much Tenderness, 
not discovering to any without the Church, nor any 
within, unless according to Christ’s Rule, and the Order 
of the Gospel provided in that case. 

6. We do promise to strive together for the Truths of 
the Gospel, and Purity of God’s Ways and Ordinances, 
to avoid Causes, and Causers of Division, endeavouring 
to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace ; 
Ephes.4i-3: 

7. We do promise to meet together on Lord’s Days, 
and at other times, as the Lord shall give us Opportuni- 
ties, to serve and glorify God in the way of his Worship, to 
edify one another, and to contrive the good of his Church. 

8. We do promise according to our Ability (or as God 
shall bless us with the good things of this World) to 
Communicate to our Pastor or Minister, God having 
ordained that they that Preach the Gospel should live of 
the Gospel. (And now can any thing lay a greater obli- 
gation upon the Conscience, than this Covenant, what 
then is the Sin of such who violate it?) 

These and. all other Gospel-Duties we humbly submit 
unto, promising and purposing to perform, not in our 
own Strength, being conscious of our own Weakness, 
but in the Power and Strength of the Blessed God, 
whose we are, and whom we desire to serve: To whom 
be Glory now and for evermore. Amen. 


At least some of the churches of the “ Barkshire Asso- 
ciation,” * (composed of the Baptist churches at ‘‘ Abing- 
don, Wantage, Newberry, Reading, Farringdon, Coate, 
and Witney’’) employed a covenant, for in the record 


of a meeting of the ‘“ Messengers” of these congrega- 
tions held at Abingdon, September 3, 1708, ‘“ Direction 


1 There is a copy of the Records of the Barkshire Association in “the Gould MS.” 


159 


4” reads: “let us see that according to our solemn Cove- 
nants & ingagements we Readily and Chearfully submit 
to y* supreme authority of Christ in his Church.” 

Two of these churches at least were organized about 
the middle of the seventeenth century. That at Abing- 
don was in existence as early as 1652, and probably 
before, but what the text of its covenant was we do not 
know. However, it is probable that this church was 
formed by the use of a simple covenant, inasmuch as 
the church at Longworth, formed in 1656 by members 
of the church at Abingdon, employed a covenant at its 
organization, the text of which has already been given, 
The church at Farringdon was formed in 1657, when 
“y* members [of the church at Longworth ?| in & about 
Farringdon were... solemnly given up to walke asa 
pticular Congregation of Iesus Christ.” This record 
probably implies the use of an informal covenant. 


THE COVENANT OF THE Baptist CHURCH AT 
GREAT GRANSDEN. 


The story of the evolution of a Baptist church at 
Great Gransden and of its organization by use of a 
covenant is worthy of study, for thereby it may in- 
dubitably be shown that members of Baptist churches 
which had grown out of Congregational churches, at 
least sometimes, did continue to employ the covenants 
they had formerly used in the churches from which 
they had come. An account of the formation of the 
Baptist church in Great Gransden, given by Mr. Thomp- 
son,' reads: 


1“ History of Protestant Dissenting Congregations,” Vol. II. Huntingdon- 
shire, No. 2. 


160 


One of Mr. Holcrafts Societies used to meet at Clapton Cum 
Croyden & after his Decease in 1694 formed themselves into a 
Separate Congregational Church by Signing the Covenant men- 
tioned under Cambridgeshire. This covenant reads as follows : 


We do in the presence of the Lord Jesus the awful crowned 
King of Sion and in the presence of his holy angels and people, 
and all beside here present Solemnly give up ourselves to the Lord 
and to one another by the will of God, solemnly promising & 
engaging in the aforesaid presence to walk with the Lord, and 
with one another in the observation of all Gospel Ordinances and 
the discharge of all relative duties in this Church of God, & Else- 
where as the Lord shall enlighten and enable us. 

Subscribed by ABC D &c. 


Fifteen Names are Subscribed. This Church had continual 
Meetings at Clapton or at Croyden & often Renewed Covenant 
& kept days of Fasting & Prayer, Their Numbers Increasing till 
April 8 1703 when they chose for their Pastor Mt Iabez Conder 
who Administered the Lord’s Supper to them on the 11" of the 
Sumer Month, M* Conder Died about the year 1724 & Ianuary 
1725 the Church Renewed Covenant & was found to consist of 
Near 30 Members, these continued in their Church State and 
were Supplied by Several Ministers till lune 22:"* 1732 when they 
Removed the Seat of the Church from Croyden to Great Grunsden 
& on Oct 10 called to Pastoral office from the Church at Evershall 
in Northamptonshire M' Benjamin Dutton at a Church Meeting on 
the 5 of August 1733 it appeared that the Members who were now 
only 16 were all Baptists & it was Unanimously agreed to form them- 
selves into a Strict Baptist Church, Sept™ 5” 1733 the Church Met & 
the Pastor having Assigned Several Reasons for their Practice Read 
12 Articles of Faith which himself & all the Members Subscribed as 
they did also the old Covenant to which had been added a Clause 
declaring that for the future none Should be admitted without Sign- 
ing the Articles & agreeing to Baptism by Immersion. 


The following interesting document’ is the covenant 
used at the organization of the Baptist Church at 


1 From the original copy now in possession of the Congregational Library, 
London, and by the courtesy of the present librarian, Rey. T. G. Crippen. 


161 


“ Bourton on the Water,” in January, 1719-20. Before 
this time those who formed the church had been mem- 
bers of an Open-Communion congregation, but now 
reorganized as a Close-Communion church. To-day 
the church seems to have returned to its earlier belief 
on the Communion question. The well-known Benja- 
min Beddome was once pastor of this congregation. 


We whose Names are underwritten having been 
Members & much the Major Part of a Church or 
Seperate Congregation late under the Pastoral Care of 
the Rev*. M*. Ioshua Head dec’. is still desirous to walk 
together in all the Ordinances of Iesus Christ, as much 
as may be, blameless. (seing that Church by reason of 
different apprehensions of some of the Brethren about 
the Choice of a Pastour; hath been, in the presence, & 
by the Advice of some neighbouring Ministers, peaceably 
dissolv’d) do now freely & heartily give up our selves 
afresh to God the Father & his Only Son our Lord & 
Lawgiver; & to one another according to his Will. 
And so becoming a new Church or Sacred Society 
incorporated by the Gospel Charter, do now in the 
presence of God & those that are here Witnesses of our 
Order unanimously agree in the Name & fear of Christ 

1.° That we will, to the utmost of our Power, 

John rs. 12,14 Walk together in one Body, & as near as 

A eet may be with one Mind, in all sweetness of 

Tjoh es Spirit, and saint like Love to each other, as 
highly becomes the Disciples of Christ 

2.°% That we will jointly contend, & strive to- 


Tude 3 gether for the Faith & Purity of the Gospel, 
in gh io the Truths of Iesus Christ, & the Order, 
eee A: 25 Ordinances, Honour, Liberty, & Priviledges 


of this his Church against all Opposers 
3.°% That we will with all care, Diligence, & 
Phil'2. 1-3 Conscience labour & study, to keep the 
oa Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace, 
L 


-12.Cof 23: 22 


Rev 2. 14, 20 


thl 
Dee 


Gal 6. 2 
Heb 13. 3 

i. Cor 12, 25 
2 Tim 1. 16 


6, thy 


Ephes 4. 2 
Rom 14. 13 & 
eG. x 

Col 3. 12 

1 Cor 13. 4,7 


thl 
rian 


Heb 10 : 23 to 
the end 
2 Tim 4. 10 & 16 


8 thly 


Cant 4. 12 
Provateug 
1 Tim 5. 13 


162 


both in the Church in general, & in particu- 
lar between one another 

That we will carefully avoid all Causes & 
Causers of Divisions as much as lyes in us, 
& shun those that are Seducers & false 
Preachers of Errours & Heresies 

That we will sympathize & have a fellow 
feeling (to our power) with one another in 
every Condition, & endeavour to bear each 
others Burthens, where we are joyfull or 
sorrowfull tempted or otherwise, that we 
may be mutual Helps to one another, & so 
answer the End of our near Relation 

That we will forbear, & bear w.™ one anothers 
weaknesses & Infirmities in much Pity, Ten- 
derness, Meekness, & Patience not daring to 
rip up the weakness of any to those without 
the Church, nor to those that are within, un- 


less it be according to Christ’s Rule & Gospel 


Order, endeavouring all we can for the Glory 
of the Gospel, & for the Credit of this Church 
willing to cover & hide one anothers Slips & 
common failings that are not sinfull 

That we will, as our God shall enable us, 
cleave fast to each other to the utmost of 
our power; & that if perilous Times should 
come, & a Time of Persecution (which God 
for our nonproficiency may justly send) we 
will not dare to draw back from our holy pro- 
fession, but will endeavour to strengthen one 
anothers hands, & encourage one another to 
Perseverance, let what will fall to our Lot 
We do promise to keep the Secrets of our 
Church entire without divulging them to any 
that are not Members of this particular Body, 
tho’ they may be otherwise near & dear to 
us; for we believe the Church ought to be as 
a Garden enclosed & a fountain sealed 


th! 
Bin 


2 Cor 6 14 to 
the End 

1 Cor, 7°39 

Mal 2. ro 


I t, tly 


Lev 19. 17 
Gal 6. x 
Heb ro. 24 


12 thly 


Heb ro. 25 
Acts 2. 42, 46 


Eh Paes 


x Cor 12. 26 
2 Thes 3. 1, 2 
Rom 12. 15 
Acts 12. 12 

r Thes 5. 25 


163 


Those of us that are or may be single 
persons do fully design never to enter into 
conjugal Bonds with any that are Unbe- 
lievers for we believe it to be a Sin to be 
unequally yoked, that it is contrary to the 
Rule of Christ, & the ready way to hinder 
our souls peace, growth, & eternal Wellfare 
That we will communicate to one another 
of the good Things of this Life, as God hath 
or may prosper us, so far as our Ability will 
suffer, or any of our Necessities shall be 
thought to require 

That we will endeavour to watch over one 
anothers conversation for Good, not for each 
others halting, yet so as not by any means 
to suffer sin to rest in the bosom of our 
Brother but to remove it by using all pos- 
sible Means to bring the person to repent- 
ance & Reformation of Life; & that we 
will endeavour to provoke one another to 
Holiness, Love, & good Works 

We do all purpose constantly to attend the 
Meetings appointed by the Church, both on 
the Lord’s days & other Days, nothing hin- 
dring except Distances, sickness, or the 
Works of Mercy & Necessity 

That We will make Conscience of praying 
for one anothers Wellfare at all times, but 
especially in Time of Distress, as Poverty 
Sickness, Pain, Temptation, Desertion, or 
the like ; & that we will pray for the Peace 
& Growth of the whole Church in general 
& for our Ministers & the success of their 
Ministry in an especial manner 


Signed at Bourton on the Water 
the 30." day of Ianuary 1719-20 


[Eighty-two marks and names. | 


164 


In England from the first the Baptists evidently did 
not lay so much emphasis on the use of a covenant in 
the formation of their churches as did the Independents. 
In many cases, however, our sources of information are 
so meagre that no definite answer can be obtained as to 
whether certain Baptist churches employed a covenant. 
For instance, in regard to the Baptist congregation in 
Bath, Somersetshire, Josiah Thompson can say merely :* 


The latter End of the Year 1744 a few of them met together in 
a private House on a Lords Day for the Purposed religious Wor- 
ship. In 1747 they took an upper Room in Kingsmead Square 
which was opened by Mt Hugh Evans of Bristol & an Evening 
Lecture was supplied & kept up by y?® Bristol Ministers of this 
Denomination. Here they continued for a Year and half & 
then removed to a more convenient Room fitted up in Collets Back 
Yard Horse Street where they continued several Years, & were 
Supplied by a Variety of Ministers from Bristol, Bradford, & else- 
where. August 1752 they formed themselves into a regular 
Church consisting of nine Members, soon after which they had 
six Persons added to them who were baptized at Paulton. 


The Particular Baptist Church at Hail Weston, which 
was organized at Little Stoughton, Bedfordshire, on 
“June 14: 1757,” doubtless used a covenant from the 
beginning, but its records were not kept till 1802, when 
the account? for the preceding fifty years was made up. 
In this were “recorded also the form of their church- 
covenant [the church covenant used in 1802 probably J, 
the form of admission to fellowship with the church, and 
the Articles of their faith.’ The first of these docu- 


1 « History of Protestant Dissenting Congregations.”” Vol. 1V. Somersetshire. 


2 Some Account of the Nonconformist Churches at Hail Weston and St. 
Neots.’”’ By Joseph Rix. 1855. Vol. V., pp. 45, 46. Doctor Williams’ Library, 
London, 


165 


ments, with a few verbal exceptions, corresponds with 
the covenant adopted by the dissenting church at Kim- 
bolton in 1692. 


THE CHURCH COVENANT, 


We do in the awful presence of God, and of the Lord 
Jesus Christ, the Crowned King of Zion, and in the 
presence of his Holy Angels, and the presence of his 
people, and all besides here present, solemnly give up 
ourselves to the Lord, and one another by the will of 
God, Solemnly promising and Engaging in the aforesaid 
- awful presence to walk to-gether with the Lord, and one 
another, in the observation of all Gospel ordinances, and 
in the Discharg of all Relative Duties, in this Church of 
God, and elsewhere, as the Lord Shall Enlighten and 
Enable us. 


THE Form oF ADMISSION. 


if you now Brother (or Sister) in the awful presence 
of god, of the Lord Jesus Christ, of his holy angels, of 
his people, and all besidse here present, do give up your- 
self unto the Lord and unto us his people, by the will 
of god, Solemnly promising and Engaging, in the afore- 
said awful presence, to walk with god, and us his Church 
and people, as the Lord Shall Enable and Enlighten you, 
Signify it by lifting up your Right hand to the Lord, 

we likewise in the aforesaid awful presence do Re- 
ceive you into our Communion, Solemnly promising and 
Engaging to Carry it towards you as a Church of Christ, 
watching over you in the Lord, 

in testimony whereof we give you the Right hand of 
fellowshipe wishing your Coming into this Church may 
be with a Bllesing unto us and you. 


It may be remarked here that this covenant with the 
‘Form of Admission” is not only practically the same as 
that of the church at Kimbolton, adopted in 1692, but 


166 


is also, with the change of a few words, the same as that 
used by the Congregationalist church at Bassingtown 
about 1655, while the covenant, it will be remembered, was 
used by the Baptist church at Great Gransden at its or- 
ganization in 1733. Here, then, is a covenant whose 
history we can trace, in part at least, for nearly one 
hundred and fifty years. It was originally a Congrega- 
tional covenant, but in the course of time was adopted 
by a Baptist church as a document suited to its uses. 
It may be noticed further that the form of admission 
is of the same general type as the covenant of the First - 
Congregational Church in Chelsea, Mass., of the date 
1875, to which reference will be made later. 

These various documents which have been quoted 
must suffice to show how extensively the covenant idea 
was made use of by English Baptists. It evidently was 
never very popular with them as a body, but during the 
eighteenth century more Baptist churches in England 
seem to have employed a covenant than before or since. 
Certainly a church covenant was never generally used 
in the organization of English Baptist churches of any 
particular period, and years ago cases of the churches in 
which the covenant was used were ‘‘very rare.””) Indeed, 
apparently, to some modern English Baptists the term 
“covenant” has no significance in connection with a 
Baptist church. Indeed, it probably may truly be said 
that in general the church covenant idea among English 
Baptists is gradually sinking, or has already sunk, into 
oblivion. | 


1So says Principal George P. Gould, Regent’s Park College, London, in a letter 
to the author, : 


CHAPTER, XI 


THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHURCH COVENANT IDEA IN 
AMERICAN CONGREGATIONAL AND BAPTIST 
CHURCHES SINCE 1640 


ETWEEN 1630 and 1640 about twenty thousand 
B Englishmen had been transported to the shores of 
Massachusetts Bay, and by 1646 over fifty-two Congre- 
gational churches had been founded in New England.! 

The long discussion, to which reference has been 
made, as to what was the proper gospel church polity, 
gradually developed into the great controversy among 
the pastors of the New England Congregational churches 
themselves, later called the “ Half-Way Covenant Con- 
troversy,” which lasted till the middle of the eighteenth 
century and even longer. Though half-way covenants 
did not admit to the privileges of full communion, yet 
the controversy was of so great importance and had so 
enduring an effect on the Congregational churches of 
America that the Half-Way Covenant idea and the cir- 
cumstances which led to its adoption may not be passed 
over in silence. 


THe Haur-Way Covenant IDEA. 


It has been shown by various modern writers that the 
Brownists or Independents must have obtained some of 


1 See Professor Walker’s “Creeds and Platforms,’’ p. 174, and note 2, 


168 
their ideas through Anabaptist influences. At least one 
early controversial writer also suggested that Browne’s 
Separatist plan might lead to Anabaptist views.’ In 
history it did this and more, for Robert Browne had em- 
bodied in his ideas on church polity one radical incon- 
sistency. He would have a Separatist church formed 
only of believers, and yet the children of these believers 
must not be left outside of the covenant promises. 
This, on the one hand, led many thoughtful Independ- 
ents in the course of time again to separate into churches 
composed solely of believers, or, at least, to seek bap- 
tism on profession of faith ;* on the other hand, in New 
England it caused many churches to find themselves in 
the greatest embarrassment, after the lapse of forty or 
fifty years, because children of church-members, who 
had been baptized and had been considered to be truly 
members of the church, as having shared in their par- 
ents’ covenanting, had grown up without any religious 
experience, and therefore could not be admitted to the 
rights of full church-membership. If the churches 
should continue in this condition another generation it 


1 In “ A Plaine | Refutation | of M. Giffards Booke, | intituled, A short treatise | 
gainst the Donatistes of | England,” etc., “By Henry Barrowe,” p. 65, occurs such 
a suggestion: “ At length he [probably Mr. Giffard] hath found out a meruey- 
lous knot in a rush, and of the same made such a snare for his Brownzstes, as they 
must needes ezther confesse the baptisme of thety CHURCH fo be a signe of the 
couenant. And so they all from thetr ancestors and thetr whole Church are 
within the couenant, or ells if they deny tt, fal into the heresie of the Catabap- 
tistes [Anabaptists], axd make themselues also without the couenant or ells to haue 
a couenant without seales.”’ 


2 In confirmation of this, see the following statement by the Rev. John Lewis, 
‘Minister of Mergate,’”’ in a “ Brief History of the English Anabaptists, March 1, 
1741," p. 42 (MS. in Bodleian Library, Oxford, Press mark, Rawlinson C. 409). 
“It is certain that here in Exgland the Barrowists or Independents were wonder- 
fully pleased with this Novelty, and flocked in great numbers to the Jordans of the 
Anabaptists, and hundreds of Men and Women together were baptized by going 
into rivulets and arms of the River Thames, and there having their Heads dipped 
into the Water.” 


169 


was thought they would be greatly weakened in power 
and, indeed, be in a pitiable state. 

Yet certainly they would not turn for rescue to the 
Baptists whose baptism on profession of faith they had 
spurned, and thus lay open their full indebtedness to 
Anabaptist principles. It seemed preferable to them to 
have two kinds of members, full members and partial 
members, of whom the latter would share some of the 
benefits of the covenant in which their parents had en- 
gaged, but could not vote or participate in the Lord’s 
Supper. Such double membership was made possible 
by the use of what came appropriately to be known as 
the “ Half-Way Covenant.” By this unregenerate men 
could continue to have partial connection with the 
church and might have their children baptized. 

Half-Way covenants, however, never came to be 
adopted by all Congregational churches, but individual 
pastors made and employed them at their own pleasure, 
in some cases before the churches themselves had ex. 
pressed approval. A ministerial convention, composed 
of sixteen or seventeen pastors, held in Boston in 1657, 
supported the Half-Way view. In 1662, also, a synod 
was held at Boston, where practically the same conclu- 
sions were reached. From that time on till the early 
part of the nineteenth century Half-Way covenants were 
used in the great majority of the New England Congre- 
gational churches. By the first quarter of the eighteenth 
century even unregenerate persons of unblamable char- 
acter, who had not been born in religious families, 
might “own” the Half-Way covenant and have their 
children baptized. Nor was this all, but by the spread 
of what was known as “Stoddardeanism” in western 


170 


Massachusetts and Connecticut, it became “the duty of 
all who were sincerely desirous of living a Christian life, 
and who were church-members by birth, even though 
not consciously regenerate, to partake of the Lord’s 
Supper 

In 1749 Jonathan Edwards began to set his influence 
against this low ideal of church-membership, which he 
himself for twenty years seems to have favored. Other 
able men followed his lead, with so good result that the 
Half-Way practice was given up entirely in Congrega- 
tional churches after 1828. 

In President Edwards’ time evidently a regular form 
of Half-Way covenant had come to be used by Congre- 
gational churches in America. It has even been said* that 
Jonathan Edwards himself probably ‘approved and ad- 
ministered that form of it [the Half-Way covenant] then 
generally current among the churches.”’ 

This was very likely true before 1749, for we know 
that President Edwards “[16-27 March, 1741-2] ad- 
ministered a most solemn covenant—so minute in its 
terms as to contain one thousand five hundred and 
sixty-eight words, and to occupy four closely printed 
octavo pages—to his ‘ Congregation in general, that were 
above fourteen Years of Age’; one specification of 
which bound them to examine themselves strictly, ‘es- 
pecially before the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper.’ ” % 

One of the best examples of a Half-Way covenant is that 
of one of the Boston churches, which reads as follows : * 


1 Professor Walker’s “‘Creeds and Platforms,” p. 280. 
2 See Doctor Dexter’s “ Congregationalism,” p. 487 and note. 
3 Jbrd., p. 481 and note. 


4 « Magnalia,” 1820, Vol. V., pp. 268, 269. Cited from an earlier edition in Doctor 
Dexter’s “ Congregationalism,”’ p. 476, note. 


17 


You now from your heart professing a serious belief 
to the christian religion, as it has been generally declared 
and embraced by the faithful in this place, do here give 
up yourself to God in Christ ; promising with his help to 
endeavour, to walk according to the rules of that holy 
religion, all your days ; choosing of God as your best 
good, and your last end, and Christ as the Prophet, and 
Priest, and the king of your soul forever, You do 
therefore submit unto the laws of his kingdom, as they 
are administered in this church of his; and you will also 
carefully and sincerely labour after those more positive 
and increased evidences of regeneration, which may 
further encourage you to seek an admission unto the 


table of the Lord. 


Two other examples of Half-Way covenants are that 
of the Salem church, preserved in the Direction of 
1665, and that used by the First Church in Hartford in 
1696. The texts of these covenants are as follows i 


THe SALEM Harr-Way Covenant? 


I do heartily take and avouch this one God who is 
made known to us in the Scripture, by the Name of 
God the Father, and God the Son even Jesus Christ, 
and God the Holy Ghost to be my God, according to 
the tenour of the Covenant of Grace ; wherein he hath 
promised to be a God to the Faithfull and their seed 
after them in their Generations, and taketh them to be 
his People, and therefore unfeignedly repenting of all 
my sins, I do give up myself wholly unto this God to 
believe in love, serve & Obey him sincerely and faith- 
fully according to his written word, against all the temp- 
tations of the Devil, the World, and my own flesh and 
this unto the death. 

I do also consent to be a Member of this particular 
Church, promising to continue stedfastly in fellowship 


1 Text from Professor Walker’s “ Creeds and Platforms,” p-121, 


172 


with it, in the publick Worship of God, to submit to 
the Order Discipline and Government of Christ in it, 
and to the Ministerial teaching guidance and oversight 
of the Elders of it, and to the brotherly watch of Fel- 
low Members: and all this according to Gods Word, 
and by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ enabling me 
thereunto. AMEN. 


THe Hartrorp Hartr-Way CovENANT 
OF 1696." 


We do solemnly in y® presence of God and this Con- 
gregation avouch God in Jesus Christ to be our God one 
God in three persons y® Father y® Son & y® Holy Ghost 
& y* we are by nature child of wrath & y‘ our hope of 
Mercy with God is only thro’ y® righteousnesse of Jesus 
Christ apprehended by faith & we do freely give up 
ourselves to y° Lord to walke in communion with him 
in y® ordinances appointed in his holy word & to yield 
obedience to all his cofhands & submit to his governm’ & 
whereas to y® great dishon" of God, Scandall of Religion 
& hazard of y® damnation of Souls, y* Sins of drunken- 
ness & fornication are Prevailing amongst us we do 
Solemnly engage before God this day thro his grace 
faithfully and conscientiously to strive against those 
Evills and y® temptations that May lead thereto. 


Concerning these last two Half-Way covenants Pro- 
fessor Walker says :” “Like this Salem Direction the 
Hartford covenant was not formally adopted by the 
church, though prepared by its pastor and used by its 
services. Fora century, at Hartford, each pastor wrote 
his own form.”’ 


1 For text see “ Church records, G. L. Walker, Hist. First Ch. in Hartford, 
Hartford, 1884, p. 248.” Also givén in Prof. Williston Walker’s “Creeds and Plat- 
forms,” p. 121, note I. 


2 Pp, 121, note, 


173 


So much concerning Half-Way covenants. We may 
now pass to a consideration of the development of 
regular church covenants among Congregationalists and 
Baptists in America since 1640. 

Attention here may be called to the fact that in early 
American history almost the only known, or recognized, 
method of forming a church was by covenant. Hence, 
at the organization of Baptist churches it is to be ex- 
pected that in New England at least, after 1640, some 
form of covenant generally was employed. Such seems 
to have been the case. This circumstance, with the fact 
that Baptist churches always have been closely related 
to those of the Congregationalists, leads us naturally to 
study the covenant development in these two denomina- 
tions in America not separately, but in comparison. 

Between 1640 and 1663 there seem to have been but 
few and unsatisfactory attempts at forming Baptist 
churches. Whether these employed covenants is not 
known. But in 1663 a Baptist church was organized at 
Swansea, Massachusetts, of which the covenant fortu- 
nately has been preserved. The history of the Swansea 
church is very interesting, for it goes back to the Baptist 
church formed at Ilston in Glamorganshire, Wales, Oct. 1, 
1649. This church had been blessed with considerable 
prosperity, when, August 24, 1662, an Act of Parliament 
was passed ejecting from the country such persons as did 
not conform to the Church of England. Among those 
ejected was the pastor of this church, Rev. John Myles, 
who, with some of his most ardent followers, came to 
America. They brought with them their church records, 
and. “at Mr. Butterworth’s house in Rehoboth, in 1663, 
John Miles, elder, James Brown, Nicholas Tanner, Joseph 


174 


‘Carpenter, John Butterworth, Eldad Kingsley, and Ben- 
jamin Alby joined in a solemn covenant together.” > A 
few months later they made a settlement and organized 
their church ? in what is now the town of Swansea, Mass. 


1 Backus’ “‘ History of the Baptists of New England,” Vol. I., p. 284. 


2 The records of the Swansea church were written into the old Welsh record book. 
In Vol. II., p. 24, of his History, Backus tells us that in 1718 the records from 1663 
to 1718 were stolen and had not been recovered in his day. But even this loss evi- 
dently did not lead the church to be particularly careful of its treasure, for only as 
long ago as 1868 the old record book had disappeared so entirely from view that the 
church-members could nowhere locate it. Carelessness evidently had finally caused 
its loss forever. But fortunately through the researches of Hon. Thomas W. Bick- 
nell, now of Providence, R. I., the old book was once more brought to light, and is 
now in possession of the Baptist church located in North Swansea. The story of its 
recovery as given by Mr. Bicknell in a letter to the author is interesting. 

About the year 1868 Mr. Bicknell was engaged in writing a series of historical 
articles on ancient Swansea. When he came to discuss John Myles and his church, 
Mr. Bicknell was compelled to stop in his work for want of material, as records 
neither of church nor town could be found. But believing that such material was 
still in existence, through information from General Fessenden, author of a History 
of Warren, R. I., he wrote to the widow of Judge Bosworth, of Warren, R. I., then 
dead several years, who had in his tifetime been considerably interested in historical 
matters. Mrs. Bosworth replied that most of the Judge’s law books ‘‘ had been sold 
and distributed, but that there were several boxes of [his] books in the loft of a meat 
market at Warren.”’ She said when she returned East she would inform him and 
they would examine the boxes. “On her return, I think in the year 1869,” says Mr. 
Bicknell, “I went with Mrs. B to Warren, found the boxes, pried open the top box 
with a butcher’s hatchet, and the first package we took up, wrapped in brown paper, 
was marked ‘Old Swansea Records,’ ‘To be returned to the Town Clerk.’”’ “ Here 
were the town records of old Swansea from the settlement of the town, with only a 
few pages gone. And in one of the books I found the Church Covenant and other 
matter relating to Myles and his historic church.” 

Through the kindness of the Rev. L. Drury, lately pastor of the church in North 
Swansea, it is possible to give here some account of the old Welsh record book and 
its contents, as well as the accompanying copy of the covenant. He says: “The 
record book brought from Wales and still in possession of the church contains about 
soo pages of about the size of a foolscap page. It is bound in pigskin, not tanned 
like leather, but’? having “the appearance of raw hide. The first entry is a list of 
members of the church in Wales, with this heading : 

66 650. 
“ «The names of the Brethren & Sisters that were added to this Church from the 
first of 8 Mo: 1649 to this Sixteenth of the same Mo: 1650.”. John Myles heads the 
list, which contains two hundred sixty-one names with their places of residence. 
After this are church records amounting to about twenty closely written pages, the 
last entry being in 1659.” 

The records from 1663 to 1718 have never yet been recovered, and probably long 
since were destroyed. The above copy of the covenant is written just before an 
entry under the date 1718, and Mr. Drury thinks it likely that it was copied into the 
records about that time. The covenant follows nearly fifty pages of letters written 
and received by the church in Wales. The Welsh records make no mention of a 
covenant. After 1718 the records continue to 1842. 


175 


THE SWANSEA CHURCH COVENANT. 
‘SWANZEY’”’ IN NEw ENGLAND. 


‘A true coppy of the Holy Covenant the first founders 
of Swanzey entered into at the first beginning and all 
the members thereof for Divers years.” 


Whereas we Poor Creatures are through the exceed- 
ing Riches of Gods Infinite Grace Mercifully Snatched 
out of the Kingdom of darkness and by his Infinite 
Power translated into the Kingdom of his dear Son there 
to be partakers with all Saints of all those Privileges 
which Christ by the shedding of his Precious Blood hath 
purchased for us and that we do find our souls in some 
good measure wrought on by Divine Grace to desire to 
be found conformable to Christ in all things being also 
constrained by the matchless love and wonderfull Dis- 
tinguishing mercies that we Abundantly Injoy from his 
most free grace to serve him according to our utmost 
capasities and that we also know that it is our most 
bounden Duty to walk in visible communion with Christ 
and each other according to the Prescript Rule of his 
most holy word and also that it is our Undoubted Right 
through Christ to Injoy all the Privileges of Gods House 
which our souls have for a long time panted after And 
finding no other way at present by the allworking Provi- 
dence of our only wise God & gracious Father to us 
opened for the Injoyment of the same We do therefore 
after often & solemn seeking to the Lord for help and 
Direction in the fear of his holy Name and with hands 
lifted up to him the most high God Humbly and freely 
offer up ourselves this day a Living sacrifice unto him who 
is our God in Covenant through Christ our Lord and only 
Saviour to walk together according to his revealed word 
in visible Gospel Relation both to Christ our only head 
and to each other as fellow members and Brethren and of 
the same Household of faith And we do Humbly Ingage 
that through his strength we will henceforth Indeavour to 


176 


Perform all our Respective Duties toward God and each 
other and to practice all the ordinances of Christ accord- 
ing to what is or shall be revealed to us In our Respective 
Places to Exercise Practice and Submit to the Govern- 
ment of Christ in this his Church: viz: 
furder Protesting against all Rending and Dividing 
Principles or Practices from any of the People of God 
as being most abomidable and loathsome to our souls & 
utterly Inconsistent with that Christian Charity which 
declares men to be Christs Disciples Indeed further de- 
claring that as Union in Christ is the sole ground of our 
Communion each with other so we are Ready to accept 
of Receive too & hold Communion with all such as by 
a judgment of Charity we conceive to be fellow mem- 
bers with us in our head Christ Jesus tho Differing from 
us in such Controversal Points as are not absolutely and 
essencially Necessary to Salvation we also hope that 
though of ourselves we are altogether unworthy and 
unfit thus to offer up ourselves to God or to do him x x x? 
a] or to expect any favor with or mercy from him x x x 
bY] will Graciously accept of this our free will offering 
in and through the merit and mediation of our Dear 
Redeemer And that he will Imploy and Improve us in 
his service to his Praise to whom be all Glory & Hon’ 
now and forever Amen. 


After about a page of comments, evidently made by 
the copyist and his fellows, occurs the following item : 


The Names of the Parsons that first Joyned them- 
selves in the Covenant aforesaid as a Church of Christ. 
Iohn Miles Elder Iohn Butterworth 
Iames Brown — Eldad Kingsley 
Nicholis Tanner Benjamin Alby 
Ioseph Carpenter 


1 The crosses in the text of the covenant indicate words made illegible by fre- 
quent handling, but supplied at the bottom of the page. The words in brackets 
after the crosses are the words probably to be supplied. 


177 


Another of the oldest Baptist churches in America js 
the First Baptist church of Boston, Mass., formed in 
Charlestown, May 28, 1665 (old style), or June.7, 1665 
(new style). The founders of the church, according to 
the old records,! were Thomas Gold, Thomas Osbourne, 
Edward Drinker, John George, who “Joyned with” 
Richard Goodall, William Turner, Robert Lambert, Mary 
Goodall, and Mary Newell, “Who had walked in that 
order in old England.” 

That this church employed an explicit covenant at its 
formation there can be no doubt from the very word- 
ing of the first item in the Church Book, quoted below, 
though the word “covenant” is not used. It is very 
simple as compared with that of the Swansea church, 
and is of the same general type as that of most early 
Congregational, or rather Independent, covenants. 


COVENANT OF THE First Baprist 
CuurcH, Bosron.? 


The 28 of the 3 Mo. 1665 in Charlstowne [ Massach Ju 
[setts] The Churche of Christ Commonly (though falsely) 
Cfal]l[e]d Annabaptists were Gathered togather And 
Entered into [goo]d fellowship & Communion each with 
other, Ingaigeing to walke together in all the appoint- 
ments of there Lord & Master the Lord Jesus Christ as 
farre as hee should bee pleased to make knowne his 
mind & will vnto them by his word & spirit, and then 
were Baptised 

Thomas Gold 
Thomas Osbourne 
etc. 


1See photograph of the first entry in the Record Book of the church, given on 
PP. 56 plus, of President Nathan E, Wood’s “ Hist. of the First Baptist Church of 
Boston.” Phila., 1899. 


2 [bid 


178 


This covenant record is valuable as clearly indicating 
that in this church, at least, the church covenant was 
employed, and the church so to speak formed, before the 
administration of the ordinance of baptism. 

That this is, indeed, the substance of the original 
covenant of the First Baptist church, Boston, is indubit- 
ably proved by the following quotation from Backus, 
who himself quotes from ‘ Russell’s Narrative.” 


A number drew off and met by themselves in Charlestown, 
till, on May 28th, 1665, Thomas Gould, Thomas Osburne, Ed- 
ward Drinker, and John George, were baptized,’ and joined with 
Richard Goodall, and Mary Newell, ‘‘in a solemn covenant, in 
the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, to walk in fellowship and com- 
munion together, in the practise of all the holy appointments of 
Christ, which he had, or should further make known to them.’’ ? 


It may be of interest to note further, that in the Con- 
fession of Faith, exhibited by the church in September, 
1665, before the Court of Assistants, atticles 7 and:.7%, 
there occurs the following statement: “(/) And those 
that gladly received the word & are baptised are saints 
by calling & fitt matter for a visible church (m) And a 
competent number of such joyned together in covenant 
& fellowship of the gosple are a Church of Christ” 
Certainly no church would have made such a statement 
in its Confession of Faith unless it employed a covenant, 
and the citation from the Records, given above, in fact 
must be the covenant text, for no other of the date 1665 
can be found in the early Records. 


1It will be noticed that Backus, contrary to the account in the Records, places 
the administration of baptism before the act of covenanting. How he happened to 
do this does not appear, but it would seem that the old record is our best authority 
for the order observed in the organization of the church. 


2 Backus’ “ History,” Vol. I., p. 288. 


date 1680, from which Backus quotes, as reproduced in 
President Wood’s admirable “ History of the First Bap- 
tist Church of Boston,” reads in full on this point :? 


It pleased God to move the Hearts of some of his dear and 
precious Servants in this Wilderness, whom he had by his good 
Word and Spirit taught, and instructed in the Way and Order of 
the Gospel, to agree together to enter into Fellowship as a particu- 
lar body, or Church, engaging one to another ina solemn Covenant, 
in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, to walk in fellowship and com- 
munion together, in the practice of all the Holy Appointments of 
Christ, which he had, or should further make known unto them. 
And thus they became a visible Church of Christ, Walking in the 
Practice, and performance of the holy Ordinances of Christ, accord- 
ing to Divine Institution. The persons who began (this so good a 
work for God), were, Thomas Gold, Thomas Osburne, Edward 
Drinker, John George, Richard Goodal, William Turner, Robert 
Lambert : the three last named, were persons whom God (by his 
Providence some time before) brought out of Old England, who 
had walked with the Baptized Churches there ; as namely Richard 
Goodal, was of a church in London, of which Mr. Kiffen is an Of. 
ficer ; and William Turner, and Robert Lambert, were of a church 
in Dartmouth, of which one Mr. Stead was Officer, 


This last quotation makes it absolutely certain that the 
First Baptist Church, Boston, was formed not only by use 
of a covenant, but by use of a covenant whose best text 
is found undoubtedly in the first item in the Records, 

Twelve years later than the organization of the First 
Baptist Church, Boston, the Mayflower Church, Plymouth, 
renewed its covenant. The account of the renewal of this 
covenant, as narrated in records of the church,? reads : 


1P. 152. 


2 Copied by Mr. H. N. P. Hubbard, curator and librarian of the Pilgrim Society, 
Plymouth, Mass. 


180 


In 1676 the Lord’s supper was six times, five members were 
admitted, 24 children were baptized. The war continuing and 
also sickness, the church set apart April 19, for fasting and prayer, 
and also May 30; for the same grounds. The General Court in 
June being sensible of the heavy hand of God upon the country 
in the continuance of war with the heathen, appointed a day of 
Humiliation to be kept, 22 day of it and added thereto a Solemn 
motion to all our churches to renew a covenant engagement to 
God for Reformation of all provoking evils. The Church attended 
that day of prayer and then the Elders appointed a church meet- 
ing to be on June 29, The Church then all met; our church 
meetings were ever begun and ended with prayer, (the Pastor 
ordinarily beginning and the Elder concluding therewith) After 
Prayer for Gods direction and blessing in so solemn a matter, A 
Church Covenant was read, and the church voted that it should 
be left upon record as that which they did own to be the substance 
of that Covenant which their Fathers enterred into at the first 
gathering of the church, 
which was in these words following, 


In the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ and in 

Obedience to his holy will and divine ordinances. 
Wee being by the most wise & good providence of God brought 
together in this place & desirous to unite ourselves into one con- 
gregation or church under the Lord Jesus Christ our Head, that it 
may be in such sort as becometh all those whom He hath re- 
deemed & sanctifyed to himselfe wee doe hereby solemnly and 
religiously & as in his most holy prescence avouch the Lord 
Jehovah the only true God to be our God & the God of ours & 
doe promise & binde ourselves to walke in all our wayes according 
to the Rule of the Gospel & in all sincere conformity to His hold 
ordinances & in mutuall love to & watchfullnesse over one an- 
other, depending wholy & only upon the Lord our God to enable 
us by his grace hereunto. 


The serious enquiry was made, in what particulars there might 
be found amongst us a violation of the holy covenant and any un- 
answerable walking thereunto. Then followed a Proposal, whether 
we were all willing to renew our covenant for Reformation. The 
Aged, godly Elder spake his mind particularly to these things, & 
then the Pastor (whom the Elder had before desired to draw up 


181 


an Instrument suitable to the purpose) read a paper in which were 
mentioned wherin our violations of covenant had bin, etc. 


A Baptist church was organized in Kittery, in the 
“Province of Maine,’ September 25, 1682. The fol- 
lowing is the Kittery covenant as given in the records of 
the First Baptist Church, Boston. 


A Coppy OF THERE SAID COVENANT. 


Wee whose names are here und?® written doe solemnly 
& on good Consideration, god Assisting us by his grace 
give up our selves to ye lord & to one another in Solemn 
Covenant, wherein wee doe Covenant & promise to walk 
with god & one with another In A dew and faithfull 
observance of all his most holy and blessed Command- 
m.™, Ordinances, Institutions or Appointments, Revealed 
to us in his sacred word of ye ould & new Testament 
and according to ye grace of god & light att present 
through his grace given us, or here after he shall please 
to discover & make knowne to us thro his holy Spiritt 
according to ye same blessed word all ye Dayes of our 
lives and this will wee doe, If ye lord graciously please 
to Assist us by his grace & Spiritt & to give us Divine 
wisdome, strength, knowledg, & understanding from 
Above to p-forme ye same without which we cann doe 
nothing John 15 : 4 2 Corinthians 3 : 5s. 
Signed by 

W™ Screeven, Elder 

Humphry Churchwood, Deacon: 

Robert Williams 

John Morgradye [Morgradge] 

Richard Cutt 

Timothy Davis 

Leonard Drown 

W™ Addams 

Humphry Axill 

George Litten 


182 


This is A true Coppy compared with ye origenall & 
owned by all our Brethren and seven sisters as Attest 
W™ Screeven in 
behalf of ye rest. 


In this connection it may be of value to compare with 
the Kittery covenant, which is doubtless a fair repre- 
sentative of Baptist covenants of this period, the early 
covenant of the Congregational church in Woburn, 
Mass., of the date 1642. This will bring to our atten- 
tion the fact that the American Baptists apparently were 
dependent on the Congregationalists not only for the 
idea, but also in some measure for the general expres- 
sion of their church covenants. 

“The Church-Covenant” of the ‘Church of Christ” 
in Woburn, “being the three and twentieth Church” 
“in the Mattachusetts Government.” Declared, June 
24; 1042: 


We that do assemble our selves this day before God 
and his people, in an unfeigned desire, to be accepted of 
him as a Church of the Lord Jesus Christ, according to 
the Rule of the New-Testament, do acknowledg our selves 
to be the most unworthy of all others, that we should 
attain such a high grace, and the most unable of our selves 
to the performance of any thing that is good, abhorring 
our selves for all our former defilements in the worship 
of God, and other wayes, and resting only upon the Lord 
Jesus Christ for atonement, and upon the power of his 
grace for the guidance of our whole after course, do here 
in the name of Christ Jesus, as in the presence of the 
Lord, from the bottom of our hearts agree together 
through his grace to give up our selves, first unto the 
Lord Jesus as our only King, Priest and Prophet, wholly 


1 Text from the church record of the First Baptist Church, Boston. Cited in 
President Nathan E. Wood’s “ History,”’ pp. 181, 182. 


183 


to be subject unto him in all thing, and therewith one 
unto another, as in a Church-Body to walk together in 
all the Ordinances of the Gospel, and in all such mutual 
love and offices thereof, as toward one another in the 
Lord ; and all this, both according to the present light 
that the Lord hath given us, as also according to all 
further light, which he shall be pleased at any time to 
reach out unto us out of the Word by the goodness of 
his grace, renouncing also in the same Covenant all 
errors and Schismes, and whatsoever by-wayes that are 
contrary to the blessed rules revealed in the Gospel, and 
in particular the inordinate love and seeking after the 
things of the world ; every Church hath not the same 
for words, for they are not for a form of words.} 


In these two covenants, notwithstanding differences of 
expression, there are certain striking resemblances. They 
are both exceedingly simple in form and in substance, 
are not extended documents, their thought is in the 
main the same, and in places their language even is much 
alike. They both state the desire to form a church on 
principles derived from the Bible ; in the first case, “Re- 
vealed to us in his sacred word of ye ould & new Testa- 
ment,’ in the second, “according to the Rule of the 
New-Testament.”” Both covenants are made first to the 
Lord and then to one another. Both rely on the assist- 
ance of the Lord or Christ for power to fulfill the cove- 
nant. As to similarity of phraseology notice that, in the 
first case, there is a “promise fo walk with god & one 
with another In A dew and faithfull observance of aul 
his most holy and blessed Commandm.*, Ordinances, 
Institutions or Appointments.” In the second, there is 
a giving up of self “¢o walk together in alt the Ordi- 


1Text from Captain Edward Johnson’s “ Wonder Working Providence” 
(Prince Society), p. 179. 


184 


. mances of the Gospel.” Again, observe that in the Kit- 
tery covenant the promise is made to walk “ according 
to ye grace of god & Light att present through his grace 
given us, or here after he shall please to discover & 
make known to us thro his holy Spiritt according to ye 
same blessed word ,’’ while in the Woburn covenant the 
expression is very similar, namely, a giving up of self on 
the part of those covenanting to walk “both according 
to the present ight that the Lord hath given us, as also 
according to all further light, which he shall be pleased 
at any time to reach out unto us out of the Word by the 
goodness of his grace.” Such similarity in the phraseol- 
ogy employed seems to indicate a familiarity on the part 
of the Baptists with the contemporary Congregationalist 
covenants. Indeed, certain expressions had by this time 
come to be employed in practically all church covenants. 
The rapidity with which the church covenant idea was 
developed among the Congregationalists, even during 
the seventeenth century, may be seen from the following 
copy of the original covenant of the Congregational 
church at Plympton, Mass., of the date October 27, 
1698. It was drawn up, therefore, but sixteen years - 
later than the covenant of the Baptist church in Kit- 
tery, but it is a very much more extended document, 
though the thought is simple. It reads as follows :! 


”) 


Forasmych as it hath pleased God who hath com- 
manded us to pray dayly that his Kingdom may come 
& be advanced & hath given directions in his holy word 
And manifold incouragements to his poore servants to 
seek & sett forward his worship and the Consummation? 


1 Text secured through the kindtiess of Rev. E. C. Davis, pastor of the Congrega- 
tional Church at Plympton, Mass. 
2 Almost illegible, but probably the word intended. 


185 


of his glory—Wee Do therefore personally present our- 
selves this daye in the holy presents of God to transact 
with him in this great affair of his Kingdom and glory 
and our own salvation And Humbling ourselves before 
the Lord for all our Sinns & the sinns of ours earnestly 
praying for pardoning mercy and reconciliation with God 
through the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ and for his 
Glorious presents & assistance of his holy spirit under a 
deep sense of our own weakness & unworthyness & with 
a humble confidence of his favorable atestation each one 
for our selves & all of us jointly together enter into a 
holy covenant with God & one with another That is to 
saye we doe according to these terms & honor of ye 
Everlasting Covenant first give up our selves & our off- 
spring to the Lord God Father Sone & Holy Ghost As 
the onely True & living God all sufficient and our God 
in covenant and to our Lord Jesus Christ our only Savior 
& prophet priest & King & the onely Mediator of the 
Covenant of Grace promissing And Covenanting through 
the help of his grace To cleave to God & our Lord Jesus 
Christ by faith in a waye of Gospell obedience with full 
purpose of heart as his Covenant people. And doe 
allso By this Act of Confederation Give up ourselves 
one unto another in y* Lord According to the will of 
God promising & engaging to cleave & walk together in 
a holly union & communion as members of the Misticall 
Body and instituted Church of Christ. Rightly instituted 
& established in ye true faith & order of the Gospell 
further obliging our selves by this our holy Covenant to 
Keep and maintain the holy word and worship of God 
committed unto us And to endeavor faithfully to trans- 
mit it to our posterity to cleave unto & uphold the true 
gospell ministry established by Jesus Christ in his church 
to have it in our Honour & esteem for ye works sake & 
to submit our selves fully & sincerely to the ministeriall 
Exercise of y° power of Christ in y® dispensation of the 
word & administration of the sacraments the Lords Sup- 
per to those in full communion & without offence Bap- 


186 


.tized to vissible church members & their infant seed as 
allso for the due application of disipline with Love care 
and faithfulness watching one over another and over all 
the Children of the Covenant growing up with us and 
all in obedience to the Blessed rule and Government of 
our Lord Jesus Christ the alone head of the Church And 
withal wee further Ingage our selves to walk orderly in a 
waye of fellowship and Communion with all neighboring 
Churches according to ye Rule of the Gospell that the 
name of ye Lord Jesus Christ Maye be one throughout all 
the Churches to the Glory of God the Father Our Holy 
Covenant wee doe in Most Sollemn Maner take upon 
our selves in all the parts of it with full purpose of heart 
as the Lord shall help us and according to the Measure 
of Grace receved wee will walk before God fully and 
steadfastly and Constantly in the discharg of all Cove- 
nant Duties & the Lord keep this forever in the thoughts 
and emaginations of the hearts of us his poore servants 
to establish our hearts unto him and the good Lord par- 
don every one of us that prepareth his heart to seek the 
Lord God of his ffathers 
Amen &c 


About the beginning of the eighteenth century it 
seems there was some uniformity manifest in the ex- 
pression of Congregational church covenants. Con- 
cerning the covenant documents of this period, Cotton. 
Mather says :' 


“The forms used by the several churches in the 
renewal of covenant, were not in all points the same, 
nor did our churches at all find that this vartformity 
was an inconvenience; but that it gave them a “derty 
and advantage to consult their own edification, by adapt- 
ing their forms unto their own special circumstances. 


1“ Magnalia,”’ 1820, Vol. V., pp, 283, 284. 


187 


However the form which, with little variation, was most 
used shall be now recited. 


“We, who thro’ the exceeding riches of the grace 
and patience of God, do continue to be a church of 
Christ, being now assembled in the holy presence of 
God, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, after humble 
confession of our manifold breaches of the covenant, 
before the Lord our God, and earnest supplication of 
pardoning mercy thro’ the blood of Christ, and deep 
acknowledgment of our great unworthiness to be own’d 
to be the Lord’s covenant-people ; also acknowledging 
our own inability to keep covenant with God or to per- 
form any spiritual duty unless the Lord Jesus do enable 
us thereto by his Spirit dwelling in us ; and being awfully 
sensible, that it is a dreadful thing for sinful dust and 
ashes personally to transact with the infinitely glorious 
Majesty of Heaven and Earth ; we do in humble con- 
fidence of his gracious assistance and acceptance thro’ 
Christ, each one of us, for ourselves, and jointly as a 
church of the living God, and one with another, in 
manner following, i. e. 

‘““We do give up ourselves to that God, whose name 
alone is Jehovah, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, the one 
only true and living God, and to our blessed Lord Jesus 
Christ, as our only blessed Saviour, prophet, priest, and 
king, over our souls, and only mediator of the covenant 
of grace, promising (by the help of his spirit and grace) 
to cleave unto God, as our chief good, and to the Lord 
Jesus Christ, by faith, and gospel-obedience, as becom- 
eth his covenant-people for ever. We do also give up 
our offspring unto God in Jesus Christ, avouching the 
Lord to be our God, and the God of our children, and 
ourselves with our children to be his people ; humbly 
adoring the grace of God, that we and our offspring 
with us may be looked upon to be the Lord’s. 

“We do, also, give up ourselves one to another in 
the Lord, and according to the will of God ; freely cove- 


188 


.nanting and binding ourselves to walk together as a 
right ordered congregation and church of Christ, in all 
the ways of his worship, according to the holy rules of 
the word of God; promising in brotherly love to watch 
over one another’s souls faithfully, and to submit our- 
selves unto the discipline and government of Christ in 
his church, and duly to attend all those ordinances, 
which Christ hath instituted in his church, and com- 
manded to be attended by his people, according to the 
order of the gospel, and degrees of communion, unto 
which we have attained ; not resting in measures attained, 
but pressing after all, And whereas the messengers of 
these churches, who have met together in the name of 
Christ, to enquire into the reason of God’s controversie 
with his people, have taken notice of many provoking 
evils, as the procuring causes of the judgments of God 
upon New-England ; so far as we or any of us have 
been guilty of provoking God by any sin therein dis- 
covered to us, we desire from our hearts to bewail it 
before the Lord, and humbly to entreat for pardoning 
mercy, for the sake of the blood of the everlasting cove- 
nant. And as an expedient to the reformation of those 
evils, or whatsoever else, have provoked the eyes of 
God’s glory amongst us, we do freely engage and prom- 
ise, as in the presence of God ; 

“First, That we will (Christ's helping) endeavour 
every one of us to reform our heart and life, by seeking 
to mortifie all our sins, and labouring to walk more 
‘closely with God, than ever yet we have done; and will 
continue to worship God in publick, private, secret ; and 
this without formality or hypocrisie: and more fully and 
faithfully than heretofore, to discharge all covenant 
duties, one to another in church. communion. 

“Secondly, To walk before God zx our houses, with 
a perfect heart, and that we will uphold the worship of 
God therein continually, according as he in his word 
doth require ; both in respect of prayer and reading the 
scriptures, that so the word of God may dwell richly in 


189 


us: and we will do what in us lies to bring up our 
children for Christ, that they may be such as have the 
Lord’s name put upon them by a solemn dedication to 
God in Christ, ought to be. And will therefore (as 
need shall be) cazechise, exhort, and charge them to 
the fear of the Lord; and endeavour to set an holy 
example before them, and be much in prayer for their 
conversion and salvation. 

“Thirdly, To endeavour to be pure from the szzs of 
the times, especially those sins, which have been by the 
late synod solemnly declared and evidenced to be the 
evils that have brought the judgments of God upon 
New-kngland ; and in our places to endeavour the 
suppression thereof, and be careful so to walk, as that 
we may not give occasion to others to sin, or speak evil 
of our holy profession. 

‘““Now that we may observe -and keep this sacred 
covenant and all the branches of it inviolable for ever, 
we desire to deny ourselves and to depend wholly upon 
the power of the eternal Spzrit of Grace, and on the free 
mercy of God, and merit of Christ Jesus : and where we 
shall fail, there to wait upon the Lord Jesus for pardon, 
acceptance, and healing for his name’s sake.” 


It will readily be seen that this covenant is longer and 
much more elaborate than that of the Plympton church, 
previously quoted, and therefore affords an even more 
excellent illustration of how very rapidly the church 
covenant was developed among Congregationalists, even 
during the seventeenth century. 

Baptist churches were not numerous in New England 
during the seventeenth century. A few others than those 
already mentioned, however, were formed, among them 
those of Gloster (1649), of Tiverton, Rhode Island 
(1685), and of Chilmark, Martha’s Vineyard (1693). 

Even from 1700 to 1740, in which year began the so- 


190 


‘ called ‘Great Awakening” or “Great Revival” in New 
England in connection with the labors of Whitefield, 
Gilbert Tennent, and others, the number of Baptist 
churches formed in New England was still compara- 
tively small, comprising those of Smithfield (1706), Hop- 
kinton (1708), North Kingston (1710), Warwick and 
Scituate (1725), Cumberland (1732), and East Green- 
wich (1743), in Rhode Island; and those of Rehoboth 
(1732), Sutton (1735), Brimfield, now Wales (1736), 
Bellingham (1737), and Leicester (1738), in Massachu- 
setts. During this period the first extant covenant of the 
First Baptist Church in Newport, R. I., also was adopted, 
being of the date May 4, 1727. 


THE COVENANT OF THE NeEwport CHuRCH.! 


We who desire to walk together in y°® fear of y® lord 
do by the help and assistance of the holy ghost profess 
our deep Sense of Sin & humiliation therefor & do now 
Sollomly in the presence of the great god y® Elect an- 
gels & one another having a Sense of our unworthyness 
Considered of our Selves & looking wholly and alone to 
y° lord Jesus Christ for worthyness & Exceptance give 
up our Selves to the lord in a Church state y* he may 
be our god and we his people through the Everlasting 
Covenant of his free grace desiring to Submitt to Jesus 
Christ as y° King & head of his Church Imbracing him 
as y® prophet priest & King of our Salvation & to con- 
form to all his holy laws and ordinances for our groath 
Establishment & Consolation y* we may be a holy Spouse 
unto him; being fully Satisfied in y® way of Church 
Communion & of y® truth of grace on Each others Soul 
in Some good measure we do now Sollomly In y° Name 
and fear of god Joyn our Selves together in a holy 
union & fellowship humbly Submitting to y® discipline 


1 Original text obtained through the kindness of Rev. Brewer G. Boardman, 
pastor of the First Baptist Church, Newport, R. I. 


191 


of the gospel and all holy Duties which our Spiritual 
relation Enjoyns & requires we promise by y® help of 
Divine grace without which we can do nothing to walk 
in all godlyness humility & brotherly love so ‘that our 
Communion may be delightfull to god and Comfortable 
to our Selves & y® rest of y® lords people to watch over 
Each others Conversation & not Suffer Sin upon one 
another as god Shall discover it to us or any of us & 
to stir up Each other to love & good works & if any 
fall into Sin to warn and admonish them according 
to y* Nature of y° offence with a Spirit of Meek- 
ness as y° gospel requires we promise & Engage to 
pray with and for one another as god Shall Enable 
us from time to time for y® glory of this Church y* 
y® presence of god may be in it & his spirit rest 
upon it & his protection over it y' it may be Increased 
with the Increase of god we do promise to bear one 
anothers burthens weeknesses Short Comings and In- 
firmities & not to acquaint any without y® garden of 
Christ of them but to observe y® Rule of Christ in 
Such Cases we do promise to strive togather for y° 
truth of y® gospel & purity of gods ordinances and 
Endevour to pass a Christian construction upon these 
y’ in Sone lesser & Extra fundimental points difer 
from us Endevouring to keep the unity of y® Spirit in 
y° bond of peace with all y* hold y* Head Jesus Christ 
both their lord and ours and y* we will not retain a 
pharisaical Spirit to withdraw in y® time of Prayer, but 
will Joyne with all Such as in y® ground of Charity are 
true beleivers & Churches of Jesus Christ we promise to 
observe y* publick worship of god on lords days & at 
other times, as god may afford oppertunity & strive what 
in us lies for Each others Edification Each and Every of 
these things, we humbly Submitt to in the Name & fear 
of god promising and Purposing to perform not in our 
own strength being conscious of our own Weekness ; 
but in y® power & strength of y® blessed god whose re- 
deemed ones we trust we are and whome we Sincearly 


192 


‘desir to Serve To whome be glory in all the Churches 
now & Evermore Amen 
Signed by us In y* Name | William Packcom 

and behalfe of the whole Eldor 
Church at a church meet- | John Comer Pastor 
ing this 4 day of May In | Samuel Maxwell Deacon 
yAV ear 1727. Philip Weeden 

Samuel Packcom 

Philip Weeden 

James Peckham 

George Hall 

Edward Smith Jun. 

William Packcom. 


The covenant of the Baptist church in Sutton, given 
below, is asomewhat shorter and perhaps more character- 
istic example of the covenants of this period than that 
last quoted. This church was constituted September 16, 
1735, and two years later Benjamin Marsh and Thomas 
Green (the latter an early planter of Leicester, Mass.,) 
were ordained its joint pastors. The church was small 
and was not long after dissolved, but a copy of its 
original covenant on a loose piece of paper has been 
preserved, and as late as 1888 was in possession of 
the Leicester Church. 


COVENANT OF THE Baptist CuHuRCH IN SuTTON, Mass.! 
(A CHH. COVENANT, &C.) (A. D. 1735.) 


Wee the Subscribers holding only to Believers Bap- 
tism: and having been so far agreed in the first Prin- 
ciples of the Doctrines of Christ, that we have sub- 
mitted our Selves unto Christian Baptism ; and do now 
Consider that we have, by our baptismal Vows, laid our 


1 “The Greenville Baptist Church in Leicester, Mass. Exercises on the rsoth 
Anniversary of its Formation. September 28, 1888.’’ Worcester, 1889. Pp. 18, 19. 


193 


Selves under strong Obligations to Serve God, and one 
another, And that we might be under better Capacity 
to Serve God, and to be helps one to another, we now 
Imbody our Selves into a Particular Church :’ that we 
may have the Power of Church Government: That we 
may by a major vote in the Church, Chuse Church 
Officers, and take in Members; and by the same Power, 
upon sufficient Reason, may Put them out of Office in 
the Church again: and lay Members under Suspension, 
or Cast them out of the Church. And for these reasons, 
We now make a Solemn Covenant one with another, in 
the Presents of the Everlasting God, First) to take the 
one, true, and living God, Father, Son, and Spirit, to be 
our God, and to look unto him at all times, for help and 
assistance, that we may perform all those Duties that he 
has enjoined upon us: and that we may be kept from 
all Sin and Error. (2ly.) We take the Scriptures of the 
holy Prophets, and Apostles, to be our Rule of Faith 
and Obedience. (3ly.) We Promise, one to another, 
to Worship God, according to the Rules of the Gospel. 
(4ly.) We Promise, that in the Church whereunto we 
do belong, we will endeavor to keep the Worship of 
God pure from human inventions. (Sly.) We Promise, 
to take the watch care, and Over-sight one of another: 
That if a brother or sister should be overtaken ina Fault, 
to Restore Such an one in the Spirit of meekness. (6ly.) 
We Promise, that as much as in us lays, we will indeavor 
to keep the Unity of the Spirit, in the Bond of Peace. And 
that, we will indeavor to live together in Love, Peace, and 
Charity, So long as God in his Good Providence shall keep 
us together. These, and all other Christian duties, we 
Promise, by Divine assistance to perform ; Looking unto 
Jesus, the author and finisher of our Faith. 
Dated September 16th, 73s. 
Thomas Green, &c. 


This document manifests a great advance in the form 


_ and substance of the covenant as compared with that of 
| N 


194 


‘the church in Kittery. Notice the long introduction 
and the increased number of divisions or sections, as 
well as their orderly presentation ; also the considerably 
increased length of the whole. 

After the ‘Great Awakening ’”’ Baptist churches rap- 
idly became more numerous, so that even before the Revo- 
lution as many as twenty-five or six new Baptist churches 
had been formed in Massachusetts alone. Each of these 
churches, in all probability, had its covenant, varying in 
expression, but retaining what had come to be con- 
sidered the essential features of covenant documents. 

The Baptist church covenants of this period may be 
represented by that employed at the organization in 1768 
of the church in North Berwick, Maine. The word “ cov- 
enant”’ is not employed in the records of this church, but 
that a covenant was used at its formation is certain. The 
substance, and even what is probably the original text, 
appears in the church book in the form of a record, as 
given below. 

“ The first entry in the records of this church is under 
the date of June 28, 1768, when the church was organ- 
ized.’ First come the usual Articles of Faith, to which 
are appended the names of the original members of the 
church. Then we have the following, which is un- 
doubtedly the church covenant: | 


Being incorporated into a Baptist church of Christ ; 
by considering and approving the Baptist Confession of 
Faith, through examining the Scriptures, we find them 
pointing out that way of worship prescribed by Christ 


1 Centennial Discourse delivered on the One Hundredth Anniversary of the 
Organization of the Baptist Church in North Berwick, Maine, Sept. ro, 1868,”’ by 
Edmund Worth, pastor of the Baptist church, Kennebunk Village. Biddeford, 1868. 


195 


and his apostles: we do heartily comply with them de- 
siring these truths may spread far and wide. And as 
we profess this, we promise to walk according thereto as 
God shall enable us, and that we will help to support 
and assist in everything conducive to the spread of the 
gospel in this place as God shall help us, bearing our 
part of all necessary charges that may arise in this church 
of Christ hereafter, ! 


This document shows that individual Baptist churches 
still used considerable freedom in the expression and 
substance of the covenant, 

From the time of the Revolution until 1832, when the 
New Hampshire Baptist State Convention made the 
first largely successful movement toward uniformity in 
Articles of Faith and Covenant among Baptist churches 
in America, the number of Baptist churches in New 
England had increased to seven hundred and sixteen, 
though, doubtless, there was by no means a correspond- 
ing variety of covenant formulas. 

A good example of the church covenants of this 
period may be found in that published in the minutes of 
the Bowdoinham Association, Maine, in 1795, but of an 
earlier date, and another in the minutes of the same 
association for 1817, 

The first of these covenants reads as follows : 


We do now, in the presence of all seeing and most 
gracious God, and before Angels and men, give up our- 
selves to the Lord Jehovah, Father Son and Holy Spirit, 
and avouch him this day to be out Father, Saviour, 
Leader, and Teacher, and receive him as our only por- 


1 «Centennial Discourse delivered on the One Hundredth Anniversary of the 
Organization of the Baptist Church in North Berwick, Maine, Sept. ro, 1868,”’ by 
Edmund Worth, pastor of the Baptist church, Kennebunk Village. Biddeford, 1868. 


196 


tion for ever Also we receive Jesus Christ as the 
Supreme head of the Church: and mediator of the new 
covenant: and our Prophet, Priest and King to govern 
and teach us in the way to, and appear as our advocate 
with the Father for our admittance. We acknowledge 
it is our indispensible duty to glorify our covenant God, 
by living holy lives in this present world, in all our 
several places and relations. And we engage by divine 
assistance to improve our time, strength, talents, and ad- 
vantages for the glory of God, and the good of our fel- 
low men. Promising that by divine help we will walk 
in our houses in the fear of God : training up those com- 
mitted to our care in the nurture and admonition of the 
Lord. We also give up ourselves to one another, cove- 
nanting and promissing to act towards each other as 
brethren in Christ: Watching not only against those 
that are called more gross evils, but also against all fool- 
ish talking and jesting, which is not convenient ; also 
disputing about words and things that lead to strife, or 
disregarding promisses, and not fulfilling engagements, 
tatling and backbiting, spending time idly at taverns or 
elsewhere, and all vain and unnecessary conversation on 
the Lord’s day; or whatsoever is contrary to God’s 
word. Promissing to hold communion together, in the 
worship of God, ordinances of Christ and discipline of 
his church, according as we are or shall be guided thereto 
by the word and spirit of God: Believing that he will 
further and more gloriously open his word and_ the 
mysteries of his kingdom. Mean while flying to the 
blood of the everlasting covenant for the pardon of our 
many errors, and praying that the Almighty would pre- 
pare and strengthen us for every good work: working 
in us that which is well pleasing in his sight, through 
Jesus Christ our Lord. To whom be glory for ever and 
ever, Amen. 


With the above it will be interesting to compare a 
representative Congregational covenant of a somewhat 


197 


earlier date, viz, a later covenant of the Woburn Church, 
Mass., adopted in 1756. 


THE WOBURN COVENANT OF 1756.! 


We whose names are hereunto subscribed, appre- 
hending ourselves called of God into a Church State of 
the Gospel, do first of all confess ourselves unworthy to 
be so highly favored of the Lord, and admire that rich 
& free grace of his that triumphs over so great unworthi- 
ness, and with an humble reliance upon the aids of grace 
therein promised to those who, through a sense of their 
own inability to do any good thing, do humbly wait on 
him for all, we do thankfully lay hold on his Covenant, 
and chuse the things that please him. 

I. We avouch the Lord to be our God, and give up 
ourselves and our Seed after us in their generations to 
be his people, in the truth and sincerity of our hearts. 

2ly. We give up ourselves to the Lord Jesus Christ, 
to be ruled and guided by him in the matters of his 
worship, and in our whole conversation ; acknowledging 
him not only our alone Saviour, but our King to reign 
and rule over us, and our Prophet and teacher by his 
word and Spirit ; forsaking all other teachers and doc- 
trines which he has not commanded ; and we do wholly 
disclaim our own righteousness in point of Justification, 
and depend alone upon him for righteousness and Life, 
Grace and Glory. 

3ly. We do profess ourselves to be Congregational 
in our Judgment, and do purpose to practise upon Con- 
gregational principles, as far as they are agreeable to the 
doctrines of God’s word, looking upon the Platform of 
Discipline in general, as gathered out of the word of 
God, and agreeing therewith. } 

4ly. We do further promise, by the help of Christ, to 
walk with our brethren and sisters of this Congregation 


1 Samuel Sewall’s “History of Woburn, Mass.”’ Boston, 1868. P. 534. Ap- 
pendix No. 4. 


198 


‘in the spirit of brotherly love, watching over them, and 
caring for them ; avoiding all jealousies, suspicions, back- 
bitings, censurings, quarrelings and secret risings of heart 
against them; forgiving and forbearing, and yet season- 
ably admonishing and restoring them by a spirit of 
meekness, and settling them in joynt again that have 
been overtaken in any fault amongst us. 

Sly. We further promise and bind ourselves in the 
strength of Christ to labour how we may advance the 
Gospel and Kingdom of Christ ; how we may win and 
gain them that are without, how we may settle grace and 
peace amongst ourselves ; and seek as much as we can 
the peace of all the Churches ; seeking the help, counsel 
and direction of other churches, if need be ; not putting 
a stumbling block before any, but will labour to abstain 
from all appearance [of evil]. 

6ly. We do hereby promise to behave and demean 
ourselves obediently in all lawfull things to those that 
God hath or shall place over us in the Church or Com- 
monwealth ; knowing that it is our duty not to grieve 
them, but to encourage them in their places, and in the 
administration of the charge which God hath committed 
unto them. 

7ly. We Resolve, by the help and strength of God, to 
approve ourselves in our particular callings as becometh 
saints : shunning idleness, not sloathfull in business, know- 
ing that idleness is the bane of any Society: Neither will 
we deal h[ardly] or oppressingly with any wherein we are 
the Lord’s stewards. And further? [finally] we promise 
to dedicate our Children to God, and to teach them the 
good knowledge of God the Lord, according to the best 
of our abilities, and to fear and serve him with us, that it 
may be well with them and us forever. 

These things we solemnly promise, as in the presence 
of the omniscient Jehovah. 


It will be observed in these longer church covenants 
that there are considerable portions which are not dupli- 


199 


cated, and yet it must be admitted that certain sections 
are strikingly similar in substance and often in expres- 
Bion YOY iistahice, “sections -1,,.2,) 4) “and. 7 of. the 
Woburn Covenant are all largely reproduced in the 
Bowdoinham Covenant. Indeed, these two documents 
certainly resemble each other very much more than 
they resemble either of the first two covenants we have 
compared. Evidently, as the church covenant idea 
developed in Baptist churches, those who drew up the 
covenants still continued to consult earlier documents, 
and possibly even those of a different denomination. 

The covenant contained in the Bowdoinham Associa- 
tion Minutes of 1817 is as follows: 


We, having been enabled as we hope, by divine grace 
to give up ourselves first to the Lord, then to each other 
in the relation of christian union and fellowship, do, in 
the presence of the all-seeing God, and of angels, and 
men, (so far as God may enable us by his grace) sol- 
emnly covenant to renounce the corrupt sentiments, vain 
amusements, and practices of the world, and to devote 
ourselves to the fear and service of God: taking the 
Holy Scriptures for our guide, and the example of Christ 
and his apostles for our pattern. We also agree to 
watch over ourselves, and strive so to order our conver- 
sation and conduct in life as to give no just occasion 
of grief to any of the children of God, or any other of 
our fellow men. To watch over each other for good ; to 
reprove, rebuke, and admonish one another in love, as 
occasion may require ; and if we at any time may know 
that any member of the Church is guilty of immoral 
conduct, that we will not expose them by tattling it to 
others, but will faithfully labor with them, according to 
the direction of our Lord: Mat. 18 : 15, 16, 17, that sin 
may be put away from among us, and that iniquity may 
vot be harbored in the Church. That we will not for- 


200 


‘sake the assembling of ourselves together, for the public 
worship of God, and at other meetings which the Church 
may appoint to transact the important concerns of Zion. 

We also covenant to regard the first day of the week 
as the Lord’s day, to be more immediately devoted to 
the worship and service of God. That we will endeavor 
to restrain our families, from those things which are not 
consistent with the solemnities of that day. That we 
will endeavor to worship God in our houses, and strive 
to bring up our children in the nurture and admonition 
of the Lord. That we will demean ourselves as good 
citizens, having all due respect to the constituted au- 
thorities of our country. That we will not neglect to 
pray for our fellow-creatures, for all that are in author- 
ity, for the peace and prosperity of Zion, and for each 
other in particular; that we will participate of each 
others joys, and endeavor with tenderness and sympathy 
to bear each others burdens and sorrows; that we will 
cheerfully bear our equal portion of those expenses 
which the Church may judge needful for the relief of 
the poor, the support of the ministry, and other neces- 
sary charges of the Church. That we will seek divine 
aid to enable us to walk in all the commandments and 
ordinances of the Lord blameless, that we may give 
practical testimony to the world, that the grace of God 
teacheth us to deny ungodliness and every worldly lust, 
and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in the world ; 
that God would enable us to fill up our lives with use- 
fulness, and at last receive us to join the Church trium- 
phant, to celebrate the praises of Him that sitteth upon 
the throne, and to the Lamb for ever and ever. AMEN. 


In 1832 the New Hampshire Convention prepared 
and approved, for the use of Baptist churches in that 
State, a “Declaration of Faith and Practise together 
with a Covenant.” Both came to be very generally 
used in New England and even beyond, especially as 


201 


the American Baptist Publication Society began to pub- 
lish them in 1853 for the churches in general in “The 
Baptist Church Manual,” prepared by J. Newton Brown, 
D. D., author of the original New Hampshire “ Declara- 
tion of Faith and Covenant.” Furthermore, the Publi- 
cation Society printed no other form of covenant for the 
general use of Baptist churches until 1895, when there 
appeared “A New Baptist Church Manual,” containing a 
slightly modified covenant of the New Hampshire type. 
Thus the New Hampshire covenant probably has been 
more widely accepted in Baptist churches in the Northern 
States at least than any other form. Indeed, it is doubtless 
true that the majority of Baptist church covenants in use in 
America to-day are based more or less on that connected 
with the New Hampshire Declaration of Faith of 1832. 
The following is the New Hampshire Covenant :! 


CHURCH COVENANT. 


Having been led, as we believe, by the Spirit of God 
to receive the Lord Jesus Christ as our Saviour ; and, 
on the profession of our faith, having been baptized in 
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost, we do now, in the presence of God, angels, 
and this assembly, most solemnly and joyfully enter into 
covenant with one another, as one body in Christ. 

We engage, therefore, by the aid of the Holy Spirit, 
to walk together in Christian love ; to strive for the ad- 
vancement of this church, in knowledge, holiness, and 
comfort ; to promote its prosperity and spirituality ; to 
sustain its worship, ordinances, discipline, and doctrines ; 
to contribute cheerfully and regularly to the support of 
the ministry, the expenses of the church, the relief of the 
poor, and the spread of the gospel through all nations. 


1 Dr. J. Newton Brown’s “ Baptist Church Manual.”’ Philadelphia, 1853. Pp. 23, 24. 


202 


We also engage to maintain family and secret devo- 
tion ; to religiously educate our children; to seek the 
salvation of our kindred and acquaintances; to walk 
circumspectly in the world; to be just in our dealings, 
faithful in our engagements, and exemplary in our de- 
portment ; to avoid all tattling, backbiting, and excessive 
anger ; to abstain from the sale and use of intoxicating 
drinks as a beverage, and to be zealous in our efforts to 
advance the kingdom of our Saviour. 

We further engage to watch over one another in 
brotherly love ; to remember each other in prayer; to 
aid each other in sickness and distress; to cultivate 
Christian sympathy in feeling and courtesy in speech ; 
to be slow to take offense, but always ready for recon- 
ciliation, and mindful of the rules of our Saviour, to 
secure it without delay. 

We moreover engage, that when we remove from 
this place, we will as soon as possible unite with some 
other church, where we can carry out the spirit of this 
covenant, and the principles of God’s word. 


PRAYER. 


Now the God of peace, who brought again from the 
dead our Lord Jesus, that Great Shepherd of the sheep, 
through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make you 
perfect in every good work to do his will; working in you 
that which is well-pleasing in his sight, through Jesus 
Christ, to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. 


With the New Hampshire Covenant we may here 
profitably compare one used by a modern Congrega- 
tional church, in order to see whether the American 
Congregational and Baptist church covenants still con- 
tinue to have that close relationship to one another that 
has been observed at earlier periods. A very close like- 
ness, except in length “and in the general expression 
cannot, of course, be expected, for though regular or 


203 


stereotyped forms are liable to appear with the lapse of 
time, it is probable that modern Congregational church 
covenants vary far more than those used to-day among 
the Baptists. Yet that of the First Congregational 
Church in Chelsea, Mass., possibly may be called a fair 
example of the best modern Congregational church 
covenants. It reads as follows :* 


In the presence of God and this assembly, you do 
now freely and cordially enter into the everlasting 


COVENANT OF GRACE. 


Humbly confessing and forsaking your sins, and be- 
lieving on the Lord Jesus with all your heart, you do 
avouch the Father Almighty, your Maker and Pre- 
server, the Lord Jesus Christ, His equal and eterna! 
Son, your Saviour and Master, and the Holy Spirit, 
your Sanctifier, Comforter, and Guide, to be your God. 

You do trust only in His sovereign grace and almighty 
power. ; 

You humbly and cheerfully consecrate your whole 
self, body, soul, and spirit, to be His, and at His entire 
disposal forever. 

You promise that you will, henceforth, faithfully 
endeavor to keep His commandments and follow Him 
in all things ; whatever you do, to do all for His glory ; 
to give diligent heed to His word and ordinances ; to do 
all that in you lies to convert the sinner from the error 
of his ways; and, denying ungodliness and worldly 
lusts, to live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this 
present world, looking for that blessed hope, and the 
glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour, 
Jesus Christ. 

This you truly confess and heartily engage ? 

[Candidates assent. ] 


1 From the Manual of the First Congregational Church, Chelsea, Mass, Boston, 1875. 


204 


[In case none join on profession of faith, the form of 
admission shall commence here. In case none join by 
letter, the following sentence shall be omitted :] 

Those who are to join this church by letter from other 
churches, having elsewhere made a satisfactory confes- 
sion of their faith, and covenanted publicly with God, 
will now present themselves to enter with those already 
before us into 


COVENANT WITH THIS CHURCH. 


[After all have taken their places, the minister shall 
say : 

oe do now cordially join yourself to this church, 
and you solemnly covenant to attend faithfully upon its 
services, to support its public worship and ordinances, 
to uphold its faith, to sustain and obey its rules and dis- 
cipline, to honor it as you may be able by an upright 
life, to labor and pray for its peace and purity, its edi- 
fication, usefulness, and prosperity, and to walk with its 
members in love and faithfulness. 

This with the Divine help you pledge yourself to do? 

[The candidates shall assent as before. | 


Then follow the welcome to the covenant by the 
church, the giving of the hand of fellowship, etc. 

If this may be regarded as an average example of the 
best covenants of the American Congregational churches 
of the present time, it may reasonably be concluded 
that the American Baptists of to-day are holding much 
more closely to the historical form of the church cov- 
enant than are the Congregationalists. This Congrega- 
tional covenant is in reality a ‘“ Form of Admission,” 
such as we have already noticed in two or three churches 
in England, and not a church covenant in the strictest 
sense of the word. } 

But, though the Baptists may follow more closely the 


205 


earlier form of the covenant, yet the covenant naturally 
does not occupy so prominent a position in Baptist, as 
in Congregational, church polity to-day, any more than 
it has occupied in the past. The Congregationalists, to 
be sure, in the case of altering a covenant of the old type 
into a “Form of Admission,” have made a slight depart- 
ure from the general view of the early churches of that 
denomination, but they have thereby, no doubt, added 
to its practical adaptability to modern church life. 

As has been said, the New Hampshire covenant is 
probably that most commonly used in American Bap- 
tist churches to-day. However, there are other forms 
employed in some churches, which differ more or less 
from it, and of which therefore some examples may 
here be given. 

The following is the covenant of the Dudley Street 
Baptist Church, Boston, Mass., as given in the manual 
of that church. 


As we trust we have been brought by divine grace to 
embrace the Lord Jesus Christ, and by the influence of 
his Spirit to give ourselves up to him, so we do now 
solemnly covenant with each other, that, God, enabling 
us, we will walk together in brotherly love; that we will 
exercise a Christian care and watchfulness over each 
other, and faithfully warn, rebuke, and admonish one 
another, as the case shall require ; that we will not for- 
sake the assembling of ourselves together, nor omit the 
great duty of prayer, both for ourselves and for others ; 
that we will participate in each other’s joys, and en- 
deavor, with tenderness and sympathy, to bear each 
other’s burdens and sorrows; that we will earnestly 
endeavor to bring up such as may be under our care in 
the nurture and admonition of the Lord; that we will 
seek divine aid to enable us to walk circumspectly and 


206 


‘watchfully in the world ; denying ungodliness and every 
worldly lust; that we will strive together for the support 
of a faithful evangelical ministry among us; that -we will 
endeavor, by example and effort, to win souls to Christ, 
and through life, amidst evil report and good report, 
seek to live to the glory of Him who hath called us out 
of darkness into his marvelous light. 


It may be remarked here, that the above covenant 
seems to be based on, and closely follows, the text of 
the church covenant’ recommended to the Baptist 
churches in Maine in 1846 by the Maine Baptist Con- 
vention. It would be interesting to know whether this 
general form of church covenant is of an earlier date 
than 1846, and what was its origin. 

The following is the covenant given in the Church 
Manual of the First Baptist Church, Philadelphia, printed 
in 18968. 


Believing that we have been redeemed by the Lord 
Jesus Christ, and by the power of the Holy Spirit have 
accepted Him as our Saviour, we do now solemnly cov- 
enant with each other, that God enabling us, we will 
strive together in brotherly love for the promotion of 
His Cause, and the development of our Christian char- 
acter, exhorting and admonishing one another as occa- 
sion may require, participating in each other’s joys and 
endeavoring with tenderness and sympathy to bear each 
other’s burdens and sorrows; That we will, by attend- 
ance at the regular meetings of the Church, sustain the 
public worship of Almighty God, and will cheerfully 
contribute of our means, for the maintenance of a faith- 
ful Gospel ministry among us, for the relief of the poor 
and for the various objects of Christian benevolence ; 
That we will regularly observe private and family devo- 


1 Contained in the Minutes of the Bowdoinham Association for 1848. 


207 


tion and endeavor to bring up those who may be under 
our care, in the nurture and admonition of the Lord ; 
That we will, in our business and social relations, seek 
to maintain an upright and Godly life, and by example 
and effort, to win souls to Christ, striving at all times to 
live to the glory of Him who has called us out of dark- 
ness into His marvelous light. 

Now the God of Peace, that brought again from the 
dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the Sheep, 
through the blood of the Everlasting Covenant, make 
you perfect in every good work to do His will, working 
in you that which is well-pleasing in His sight, through 
Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. 


In the Manual of the Free Street Baptist Church, 
Portland, Maine, the following covenant is given: 


Having been led, as we believe, by the Spirit of God, 
to receive the Lord Jesus Christ as our Saviour, and on 
profession of our faith having been baptized in the name 
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, 
we do now in the presence of God, angels, and this 
assembly, most solemnly and joyfully enter into cove- 
nant with one another, as one body in Christ. 

We engage, therefore, by the aid of the Holy Spirit, 
to walk together in Christian love; to strive for the ad- 
vancement of this church, in knowledge, holiness, and 
comfort ; to promote its prosperity and spirituality ; to 
sustain its worship, ordinances, discipline, and doctrines ; 
to contribute cheerfully and regularly to the support of 
the ministry, the expenses of the church, the relief of the 
poor, and the spread of the Gospel through all nations. 

We also engage to maintain family and secret devo- 
tion; to religiously educate our children; to seek the 
salvation of our kindred and acquaintances; to walk 
circumspectly in the world; to be just in our dealings, 
faithful in our engagements, and exemplary in our de- 


208 


portment ; to be zealous in our efforts to advance the 
kingdom of our Saviour, and to strive amidst evil report 
and good report to live to the glory of Him who hath 
called us out of darkness into His marvelous light. 

We further engage to watch over one another in 
brotherly love; to remember each other in prayer; to 
aid each other in sickness and distress; to cultivate 
Christian sympathy in feeling and courtesy in speech ; 
to be slow to take offense, but always ready for recon- 
ciliation, and mindful of the rules of our Saviour to 
secure it without delay, thus endeavoring to keep the 
unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 

Now the God of peace, who brought again from the 
dead our Lord Jesus, that Great Shepherd of the sheep, 
through the blood of the Everlasting Covenant, make 
you perfect in every good work, to do His will; work- 
ing in you that which is well-pleasing in His sight, 
through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory forever and 
éver, (Amen. 


The covenant published in “A New Baptist Church 
Manual” of 1895, of which mention has already been 
made in connection with the New Hampshire covenant, 
resembles the latter so closely that it will not be neces- 
sary to give the text here. The covenant of the Dudley 
Street Church and that of the First Church, Philadel- 
phia, are very much alike and of a different type from 
that used at the Free Street Church, which is an im- 
proved New Hampshire covenant. 

We have now seen that, in contrast with the develop- 
ment in England, a considerable degree of uniformity 
in the scope and language of the church covenant has 
been secured in American Baptist churches. This has 
been brought about gradually during the latter half of 
the past century, till now the use of a covenant of a highly 


209 


developed type has become general, at least in the 
Northern States of this country. With the American 
Congregationalists, also, covenant documents have come 
to be more and more carefully expressed, doubtless 
with a somewhat correspondingly increased similarity of 
thought and text. 


CHAPTER XiI 


THE MANNER OF USING THE CHURCH COVENANT 
THROUGHOUT. ITS. HISTORY TO THE 
PRESENT TIME 


\ \ JE have thus far traced the development of the 
church covenant idea from its informal begin- 
ning among the German Anabaptists. We may now 
properly inquire concerning the manner in which the 
church covenant has been used. On this point informa- 
tion in regard to the practice of the Anabaptists is 
meagre, but it seems that they seldom used written 
covenants, though reference has been made to one 
written document of articles of faith and covenant com- 
bined. In general, however, those seeking admission 
into Anabaptist churches, having manifested their faith 
in Christ and been baptized, probably made an informal 
covenant union with God orally and promised to be 
faithful to one another as members of the church. 

The Scotch covenants generally were either written 
on rolls of parchment, or written or printed in books 
containing many pages for signatures. The covenant 
was usually first read to an audience by an appointed 
speaker and then signed by those present. 

The manner in which independent covenants were 
used before 1640 varied. For instance, Robert Browne’s 
Church in Norwich seems to have covenanted in the 


211 


following manner, as nearly as can be determined from 
the data contained in a ‘Trve and Short Declaration.” 
First, those desiring to become members covenanted 
“to hold together.” It would seem that a written cove- 
nant document may have been prepared beforehand, in 
which evidently were several sections. Each of these 
various divisions was read aloud, probably by the pastor, 
who proved from the Scriptures the content of each 
section, and exhorted its acceptance. To each point 
the members then expressed assent orally by the words, 
“To this we give our consent.” Samuel Wilton Rix, in 
his “Brief Records of the Independent Church at Bec- 
cles, Suffolk,” however, says:' “On the formation of 
their [the Brownists’] first church at Norwich, their cove- 
nant was read aloud by one, and then subscribed by all 
the brethren.” Where Mr. Rix obtained his informa- 
tion concerning the use of this covenant does not ap- 
pear. What he says, however, may not be contradic- 
tory to the description given above, but evidently it was 
not taken from Browne’s own account. It is certainly 
quite possible that after verbally assenting to the various 
divisions of the covenant, the members may have signed 
their names also, as a final endorsement of the whole. 
But the document, if fully written out, must have been 
exceedingly informal in expression. Francis Johnson’s 
covenant, or articles, of 1591, it will be remembered, was 
a comparatively explicit written document to be signed. 

John Murton, in his “A Description,” etc., has pre- 
served for us an account of the manner in which John 
Robinson’s Church, probably at Scrooby in 1606, was 
formed. He says:? “Is this so strange to John Robinson ? 


1P, 114, 2 P. 170. 


212 


do we not know the beginnings of his Church? that there 
was first one stood vp and made a couenant, and then 
another, and these two ioyned together, and so a third, 
and these became a Church, say they.” This method of 
covenanting was, then, different from that of earlier Brown- 
ist churches, excepting possibly Smyth’s original Gains- 
borough Church, from which Robinson is said to have. 
come. In fact, this quotation may indicate the way in 
which the so-called Mayflower covenant was first used. 

The manner in which Henry Jacob’s Church was 
formed in 1616, has been recorded most fully in the 
W. A. Jessey Records, found in the Gould Manuscript. 
The following is the account: 


The Church Anno 1616 was gathered 

Hereupon y° said Henry Jacob wt Sabine Staismore, ... & 
divers others well informed Saints haveing appointed a Day to 
Seek y° Face of y® Lord in fasting & Prayer, wherein that pertic- 
ular of their Union, togeather as a Church was mainly comended 
to y° Lord: in y® ending of y® Day they ware United, Thus, 
Those who minded this present Union & so joyning togeather 
joyned both hands each w" other Brother and stood in a Ring- 
wise : their intent being declared, H Jacob and each of the Rest 
made some confession or Profession of their Faith & Repentance, 
some ware longer some ware briefer, Then they Covenanted to- 
geather to walk in all Gods Ways as he had revealed or should 
make known to them 


Thus the method of using the covenant in each of 
these earliest churches was different, and the covenant 
form generally was very simple. Indeed, simplicity was 
characteristic of most Independent covenants until 1633, 
when a counter movement possibly was initiated by the 
long written covenants, signed by the church in Rotter- 
dam under the leadership of Hugh Peter. 


213 


After 1640, generally speaking, when the Puritan dis- 
cussion concerning the church covenant had begun, 
there seem to have been among dissenters three admit- 
ted grades of church covenants, namely, long and short 
explicit, and implicit covenants, though a short explicit 
covenant may have been regarded as implicit. by some 
churches. : 

How in general were explicit covenants used after 
1640? 

In England, until 1800 at least, they appear always 
to have been written, and generally subscribed after 
having been read aloud by some one appointed. In 
America, until about 1800, Congregational covenants, 
for the most part at least, were written, but evidently 
were not usually subscribed. In place of subscription, 
when the covenant had been read aloud to those seek- 
ing membership in the churches, oral assent was re- 
quired of the candidates who previously had made an 
extended confession of sin and faith. Baptists in New 
England before 1800 on the other hand seem generally 
to have subscribed their covenants when explicit, rather 
than to have given mere oral assent. 

The method of using the church covenant among the 
early American Congregationalists is indicated in their 
denial: “That we make a vocall Church Oath or Cove- 
nant, the essentiall forme of a Church, when as wee 
Jrequently acknowledge that this Covenant which con- 
stituteth a Church, ts either tmplicite or exphcite’”’;* and 
in the statement of the English Puritans that ‘“ ¢here 
would not be such long narrations, of every one severally 


1« A | Derence | OF THE | Answer made unto the Nine Questions or Positions,” 
etc-,,1645, Preface, p.23. 


214 


as now are used, when men do enter into Church-Cove- 
nant, when each one makes a good long speech, in the 
profession of his Faith and Repentance.” > 

A clear description? of the manner in which early 
Congregational covenants were used in New England is 
given in a book entitled “A Brief | Narration | of the 
Practices | of the | Churches in Mew-England, in | their 
solemne Worship of God. London; 1647.” It reads 
as follows :° 


After this [2 ¢.,, individual “confession of faith” and 
“declaration of . . . effectual calling”’|, they enter into 
a sacred and solemne Covenant, engagement, profession 
(call it what you please) whereby they protest and 
promise (by the help of Christ) to walk together as be- 
comes a Church of God, in all duties of holinesse before 
the Lord, and in all brotherly love and faithfulnesse to 
each other, according unto God, withall producing their 
Covenant, agreed on before amonst themselves, then 
read it before the Assembly, and then either subscribe * 


1 An Apologie | of the Churches | in New-England | for Church-Covenant, | ” 
etc., London, 1643, p. 29. 


2 Quoted from “ Cottons Way in New-England.” 3°PE2, 


4 This quotation shows that subscription was sometimes practised among the 
early American Congregationalists, but it cannot have been general, as is shown 
by the following citation from a work by “‘Thomas Lechford of Clements Inne’’ 
entitled ** PLAin DEALING | oR, | NEVVES FROM | New-England,”’ London, 1642: 

“This done [z. e., the church having expressed willingness to receive the candi 
date, who had finished his ‘confession, and profession of his faith’], sometime: 
they proceede to admit more members, all after the same manner, for the most part, 
two, three, foure, or five, or more together, as they have time, spending sometimes 
almost a whole afternoone therein. And then the Elder calleth all them, that are to 
be admitted, by name, and rehearseth the covenant, on their parts, to them, which 
they publiquely say, they doe promise, by the helpe of God, to performe: And then 
the Elder, in the name of the Church, promiseth the Churches part of the covenant, 
to the new admitted members. So they are received, or admitted”’ (p. rr). 

This statement is confirmed by the following note in J. Hammond Trumbull’s 
edition of “‘ Plain Dealing,’ published in Boston, 1867: 

“Mr. Welde (Answer to W. R., 24) writes: ‘He[Rathband] tells us, We hold our 
Church Covenant must be vocall.’. . . It’s contrary (wee are sure) to our constant 
practise, that admits members into the Church by a Covenant agreed to by their 


216 


their hands to it, or testifie by word of mouth their 
agreement thereto. 


The covenant documents of this early period drawn 
up by English churches were sometimes, perhaps gen- 
erally, first written on a loose sheet of paper, from which 
they could conveniently be read. The Woodbridge 
covenant, however, according to Josiah Thompson, 
was “drawn up in a parchment Roll,” which possibly 
may have been suggested by the Scotch custom. The 
Bassingtown covenant, according to the curious account, 
““was read and subscribed by all the members stand- 
ing.” It will be remembered that when ‘it was Unan- 
imously agreed [by the remaining members of the 
Congregational church in Great Gransden] to form 
themselves into a Strict Baptist Church, Sept™ 5 1733 
the Church Met... & all the Members Subscribed 

. the old Covenant to which had been added a 
Clause declaring that for the future none Should be ad- 
mitted without Signing the Articles & agreeing to Bap- 
tism by Immersion.” After the text of the covenants, 
given respectively in the records of the Baptist church 
at Hail Weston, of the church in Kimbolton, and of the 
church at Bassington, there was, it will be remembered, 


’ 


what may be called a “Form of Admission,” or adap- 
tation of the text of the covenant for convenience in 
use. In these “Forms of Admission” one accepted 
the covenant by “lifting up” the “Right hand to the 
Lord,” not by subscription. In other words, the cov- 


enant was probably subscribed only by the founders of 


silence only: and as it is contrary to our practise, so to our writing, in the D7s- 
course of the Covenant, which expressly saith, that silent consent is sufficient” 
(p. 29, note 23). 


216 


the church. All other members entered by the “Form 
of Admission.” | 

Where the term “renew a church covenant” first 
arose is not absolutely certain. It is probably an idea 
suggested by the Old Testament. The Scotch often re- 
newed their covenants, so in the past have Congrega- 
tionalists and Baptists. We have various interesting 
accounts of the renewal of early Congregational 
church covenants. Sometimes the phraseology of an 
old covenant would be altered, generally by additions 
or by improvement in the expression. Sometimes, 
however, a covenant would be renewed just as it stood, 
because the church-members felt they had not per- 
formed what they had promised. Of renewals of this 
last kind there are two accounts in connection with the 
Norwich church, of the dates December 28, 1669, and 
October.13;' 1675, given “by Joseph. Rix, HiviLAS., as 
follows :? 


And in the Conclusion of the fast day [Dec. 28, 1669] it was 
moued by some brethren and so propounded by the Pastor to the 
Church to renue their Couenant which was asented vnto by the 
whole brethren present (except br. Kinge & br. Will Hardy who 
did both declare their desentt), notwithstanding the Church did 
proceed in the worke And the Pastor haueing mentioned the sume 
of the Couenant in shortt it was asented vnto by the whole by the 
signs of Lifting vp their hand except the two brethren before 
mentioned. 

And towards the Close of y® day [Oct. 13, 1675] (as it was 
formerly Concluded) the Church did renue their Couenant after 
this manner. the Couenant was read out of this booke Contayn- 
ing seuerall Articells being the same Couenant and Articells of 
Agreement that was entred into at y® first sitting down of this 


1 «Some Account of the Nonconformist Churches at Hail Weston & St Neots,” 
etc., pp. 51, 52, and 54, 55. 


217 


Church in y® yeare of our Lord 1644. And after the reading therof 
the whole Church (then present) both brethren and sisters did (as 
a sign of their mutuall Consent) Lift vp their right hand and so 
the meeting was Concluded with prayer and thanks giuing vnto 
the Lord. 


The above citations regarding the customs of par- 
ticular churches, concern indeed only the covenants of 
churches in England, but there is no reason to doubt 
that in general American Congregational and Baptist 
covenants of the same period were drawn up, subscribed, 
or assented to and renewed in the same way. 

In a book or pamphlet, entitled ‘A | Gospel- 
Church: | or, | God’s Holy Temple | Opened,” pub- 
lished in London in 1675, Stephen Ford gives a very 
clear statement concerning the way in which churches 
should engage in covenant. He says :' 


3. When this [gathering together & asking God for wisdom] 
is done, and their hearts are warmed with the presence of God, 
and their minds enlightened with the Spirits Beams of Light, 
shining in upon them, in answer to their Prayers ; and their hearts 
thereby faster knit to each other in Love, as to the living Mem- 
bers of Christ ; then they should declare to each other their free, 
full and cordial acceptance of, and satisfaction in one another ; 
expresse to one another their real, hearty and joynt Resolutions, 
purposes and Intentions (by the help of God) to live and walk 
together as a Church of Christ, in the celebration of all the ordi- 
nances of Christ in the Church: and engage, covenant and 
promise to take upon themselves the practice and observation of 
all the Laws of Christ, and Duties one to another in that state and 
‘Relation ; taking hold of the Covenant of Grace, accepting the 
Lord Jesus for their Lord, Head and Saviour, resigning up them- 
selves unto him, and professing their unfained subjection to him 
and all his Rules. 


1 P. 93. 


218 


A most interesting description of the manner in which 
Half-Way covenants were employed is given in a letter 
of Rev. Samuel Danforth, pastor of a church in Taun- 
ton, Massachusetts, of the date 1705. The letter reads 
in part :? 


It was a most comfortable Day the first of March, when we 
renew'd the Reformation Covenant. . . we added an Engage- 
ment to reform /dleness, unnecessary /freguenting Houses of 
public Entertainment, trreverent Behaviour in Public Worship, 
Neglect of Family-Prayer, Promtse-breaking, and walking with 
Slanderers and Reproachers of others, and that we should all in 
our Families be subject to good Orders and Government. It was 
read to the Brethren and Sisters in the Forenoon, they standing 
up as an outward Sign of their inward Consent, to the vest of the 
Inhabitants. In the Afternoon they standing up also when it was 
read ; and then every one that stood up, brought his ame ready 
writ in a Paper, and put into the Box, that it might be put on 
Church Record. . . We gave Liberty to all Men and Women 
Kind, from stxteen Years old and upwards to act with us ; and 
had three hundred Names given in to list under Christ, against 
the Sins of the Times. . . We have a hundred more that will 
yet bind themselves in the Covenant, that were then detained 
from Meeting. Let GOD have the Glory. 

Yesterday fourteen were propounded to the Church, some for 
full Communion ; others for Baptism, being adult Persons. 


We may now pass on to a consideration of the man- 
ner in which the church covenant has been used during 
the nineteenth century. In England we have already 
noticed that during the eighteenth century the covenant 
idea fell into disfavor, and that neither Congregational 
nor Baptist churches to-day make much, or perhaps 
any use of it. In the United States, however, the 
covenant is generally used by the Congregationalists 


1 Cited by Dr. H. M. Dexter in ‘‘ Congregationalism,” pp. 486, 487. 


219 


and also by the Northern Baptists, though by the latter 
it is probably more generally employed in New England 
than elsewhere. 

In answering the inquiry as to the manner in which 
the covenant is now employed we may omit any refer- 
ence to the practice of the few English Congregational 
and Baptist churches which still possibly make use of the 
covenant idea. As to the way in which the church 
covenant is employed in America it may be said that the 
custom of subscription went out of general use in Bap- 
tist churches probably a century ago. In modern 
American Congregational churches the covenant is as- 
sented to, and sometimes at least subscribed by those 
entering the membership of the church, but often evi- 
dently it is used for no other purpose. In many Baptist 
churches the covenant is renewed at certain times, 
on which occasions the pastor usually reads it to the 
members of his church, and occasionally requests oral 
assent. Possibly, however, there may be Baptist 
churches which have used a covenant in the earlier 
years of their history, but which now employ it seldom 
or never, for during the last century printed covenants 
of several types have been adopted by our churches for 
the most part, and with their use the value of the church 
covenant has greatly deteriorated. Indeed the covenant 
idea has ceased almost entirely to have for us the great 
significance it had for the early New England colonists. 
As they used it the church covenant idea gave a certain 
rugged religious character to the State, equaled only in 
Scotland ; with us it has lost its hold in the churches, 
and has little or no influence on the life outside of the 
churches. The future of the church covenant no one 


220 


with certainty can forecast, but its history during the last 
four centuries illustrates its value as well as its defects. 
The principle underlying it is one of the most interesting 
and characteristic held not only by the founders of New 
England, but also by the early Scotch Reformers, and 
by the Anabaptist and Independent leaders, both on the 
Continent and in Great Britain. 


221 


APPENDIX A 
HAMMERSMITH (ENGLAND) COVENANT 


TuE Covenant of the Baptist Church at Hammersmith, 
evidently employed at its organization November Io, 
1793, and printed apparently for the use of the church 
in 1838, is an extended document and reads as follows :* 


WE who desire to walk together in the fear of the 
Lord, do, through the assistance of the Holy Spirit, de- 
sire most sincerely to profess our deep and _ serious 
humiliation for our iniquities, transgressions, and sins, 
whereby we have justly offended the great and Holy 
God, and provoked him to pour forth his wrath and in- 
dignation upon us; we do therefore humbly implore the 
free and full forgiveness of all our sins, through the blood 
of his dear Son and our only Saviour Christ Jesus: the 
justification of our persons through his righteousness : 
and the thorough renovation and sanctification of our 
whole bodies, souls, and spirits, that we may be to him 
a peculiar people, zealous of good works: and _ finally, 
through his grace, obtain an inheritance which is incor- 
ruptible, undefiled, and which fadeth not away. 

In order whereunto, we do in the presence of the 
great and Holy God, the ‘Searcher of all hearts, in a 
deep sense of our own unworthiness, with one consent, 
solemnly and sincerely give up ourselves first to the 
Lord, and then to each other by the will of God: that 
he may be our God and that we may be his people, ac- 


1 A copy isin the Angus Collection. It is entitled, ‘‘ The Covenant of the Baptist 
Church, meeting at Hammersmith. Formed Nov. 10, 1793. Hammersmith, 1838.” 
Sm. 8vo, p. 8, 8. Press Mark 3. d, 21. (c.) 


222 


cording to the everlasting covenant of his free grace, in 
which alone we hope to be accepted through his blessed 
Son Christ Jesus: whom we take to be our Prophet to 
teach us, our High Priest to atone for and justify us, 
and our Lawgiver and King to reign over us. 

And we do heartily resolve, in humble dependance 
upon the spirit of his grace, to conform to all his holy 
laws and ordinances, for the growth, establishment, and 
consolation of our souls in Christ Jesus: that we may be 
a holy people unto him, that we may unfeignedly serve 
him in our generation, and that we may gladly wait for 
his second appearance as our glorious Bridegroom. 

Being fully convinced that a company of Baptized Be- 
lievers, who, by the grace and power of Christ in their 
hearts, under a conviction of their duty, unite themselves 
together in a holy band, giving themselves up first to 
the Lord, and then to each other, that they may walk 
together as saints, in love, peace, and constant practice 
and celebration of all the laws and worship of Christ, to 
his glory, and their own spiritual profit, is a Gospel 
Church agreeable to divine institution. 

We do therefore, (in the name and by the authority 
of our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of Saints, who is the 
only Sovereign Lord and Lawgiver to his Church,) by 
this covenant, testify and declare our subjection to him 
as such; and solemnly join ourselves in a holy union 
and fellowship ; professing in his strength humbly to 
submit to. all the discipline of his blessed Gospel, and 
heartily to fulfill all the duties therein required of a peo- 
ple who are united together in such a spiritual relation. 

As, FIRST OF ALL, to walk in all holiness, godliness, 
and brotherly love, that our communion with each other 
may be well-pleasing to «God, comfortable and edifying 
to ourselves, lovely to the Lord's people, and convin- 
cing to the world. 

SECONDLY—To watch over each other’s walk and 
conversation, to provoke one another to love and good 
works ; not to suffer sin upon one another, but to warn, 


223 


rebuke, and admonish each other with all meekness, ac- 
cording to the rules and example of our blessed Saviour. 

THIRDLY—To bear with each other’s weaknesses, fail- 
ings, and infirmities, and that with much tenderness, not 
discovering them to any without the Church, or to any 
within, unless it be done for mutual edification, accord- 
ing to Christ’s rule and authority. 

FourtH_y—To bear one another’s burdens, to cleave 
one to another, and to have a fellow feeling for each 
other in all conditions, whether outward or inward, 
which God in his wise providence shall be pleased to 
bring any of us into. 

FirtHLty—In an especial manner to pray one for 
another, for the glory and increase of this Church, for the 
presence of God in it, for the pouring forth of his Spirit 
upon it, and for his protection of it to his glory. 

SIXTHLY—As much as in us lieth to live peaceably 
with all men, and amongst ourselves to follow after the 
things that make for peace, by carefully avoiding all oc- 
casions of division ; to keep the unity of the Spirit in the 
bond of peace, by receiving into our affection and com- 
munion those whom we believe our gracious God hath 
received into his love and favour. 

SEVENTHLY—To meet together on Lord’s Days, and 
at all other such times, seasons, and places, as the Lord 
shall give us opportunity ; that we may serve and glorify 
him in the ways of his own appointed worship, and 
thereby be instrumental in edifying and building up one 
another upon our most holy faith. 

EicHTHty—Always to endeavour, to the utmost of 
our capacity, to promote, encourage, and maintain a 
holy, faithful, regular, and gifted Ministry, to take the 
charge of us, to go in and out before us as the shepherd 
before his flock ; together with all such officers as are 
by Christ appointed for the maintaining holy order and 
discipline in his Church. 

These and all other Gospel duties we humbly submit 
unto, professing and purposing to perform them, not in 


224 


our own strength, (being conscious of our weakness, ) but 
in the power and strength of our ever blessed God, through 
his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, whose we humbly hope we 
are, and whom we desire for ever to serve. AMEN. 


APPENDIX B 
BISHOP'S STORTFORD COVENANT 


In the Angus collection at Regent's Park College, 
London, there is a printed copy of “The Covenant of the 
Baptized Church of Christ, at Bishop's Stortford, Holding 
Strict Communion,” dated “Feb. 26th, 1837,” and signed 
by amember. The document covers four printed pages, 
and was to be “signed by the whole church, and by every 
member at the time of admission, when this covenant is 
also read and presented.”” The covenant reads as follows: 


L—wWe do sincerely and without reserve surrender 
ourselves unto our Lord Jesus Christ, and to one an- 
other, to walk together in Church fellowship, according 
to his word, promising with a dependence on his grace 
alone to hold and maintain a holy fellowship, endeavour- 
ing to watch over and edify one another in love. 

Il.—We acknowledge the Holy Scripture of the Old 
and New Testaments to be the word of God, and 
solemnly engage to make them the rule of our faith and 
practice. ii, Tim. -3.-15. EO.517, 

Il].—The leading principles of this sacred volume as 
they appear to us, and, the belief of which by signing 
our names hereto we do solemnly avow are as follow : 

1. Three divine and equal Persons in the Godhead. 
Matt. xxviii. 19, i. John, v. 7. 

2. Original Sin and the consequent entire depravity 
of Human Nature. Rom. v. 12.—2I. 


228 
te ees co] 

3. Eternal and Personal Election to holiness and hap- 
piness. Eph. i. 3.—12. 

4. Particular Redemption through the sufferings and 
geathiror Christ; Johns re. Roms ri 7. 

5. Efficacious Grace in Regeneration. John iii. 5. 
_ Eph. i. 19. 

6. The complete Justification our Persons by the 
Righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by 
Pfaith.. Rom. iis 27. 22. Galsil, 16o;Hebs 12,—14. 

7. Sanctification of the heart by the operations of the 
Holy Gia Corry, 31) 12 hes. a. 132.1 Peter.1. 2. 

8. The final perseverance of all true believers in faith 
and holiness. Phil. i. 6. John x. 28. 29. 

9g. The Resurrection of the dead. 1 Thes. 4. 16. 17. 18. 

10. The Future Judgment. Matt. xxv. 31.—46. 

11. The Eternal Happiness of the Righteous. John 
xvi. 24. Mat: 7.. 21; 

12. The Everlasting misery of all who die impenitent. 
i Cor vi. 9.10. Kev, xxi. ‘8, 27. Matt, xxvur46, 

13. Baptism by immersion in water, on a profession 

of repentance and faith, and the supper of the Lord to be 
_ positive ordinances of the Gospel. Matt. xxviii. 19. John 
iii, 23. Rom. vi. 4. Acts viii. 12. 36. 39. 1 Cor. xi 23-26. 

14. The summary of our duty to our God—to ourselves 
—and to one another we believe to be contained in the 
Moral Law, which we hold to be the rule of life to believers 
as well as to others. 1 Tim. i. 8. Rom. vii. 22. Rom. iii. 31. 

1V.—We solemnly bind ourselves to endeavour to at- 
tend the public worship of God with our Brethren as 
constantly as possible, or if necessarily prevented some-, 
times, yet to make a point of attending on the celebra- 
ton of the Lord's Supper. eb, x..25. 

V.—We consider it our duty to read the Scriptures 
and to pray with and for our families—To be peaceable 
and obedient subjects of the civil government of our 
Country, in all things consistent with our duty to God.— 
To be sober and temperate in our deportment.—J ust 
and upright in our dealings:—And studious to promote 

P 


226 


peace and good will amongst all men.—As masters, to 
be kind and just.—As servants, faithful—aAs husbands, 
affectionate.—As wives, obedient.—As parents, to en- 
deavour to train up our children in the nurture and ad- 
monition of the Lord.—And as children, to reverence 
our parents... Iitus 1. 11.;12. Eph. iv’ Col iit. 18-23: 

VI.—We solemnly bind ourselves to behave affec- 
tionately towards our Pastor—To pray for him—and 
willingly to contribute to his support—and to obey him 
in all things wherein he warns, counsels, and exhorts us 
according to the word of God. 2 Thess. iii. 1. 

VII.—With respect to our fellow members that we 
cherish a modest, kind, sympathizing, free, open, faithful, 
forgiving behaviour.—that we will neither suffer sin to rest 
on their heads, nor needlessly expose their failings, but will 
tell them of them and be willing to be told of ours in re- 
turn: <1 Thess. vo 1e—r1s5.> Phil’ i. 1. 5..Cok iit 2. 

VIII.—We solemnly promise to pray for one another 
and in every possible way strive to promote each others 
welfare. Gal. vi. 9. 10. 

IX.—In all matters of Judgment in the Church, we 
solemnly bind ourselves to be faithful to our consciences, 
yet never to indulge a contentious spirit—We will aim 
to act in harmony with our brethren as much as possible, 
and if in any instance we cannot agree with them, we 
will remember that others have judgment as well as us, 
and if we be the lesser number, we will peaceably sub- 
mit to the greater. 

X.—We do solemnly promise that we will not expose, 
but keep secret the differences or any of the transac- 
tions of the Church, which it is prudent to conceal from 
those who are not of its communion. 

Now unto him that-is able to keep us from falling, 
and present us faultless before the presence of his glory, 
with exceeding joy, to the only wise God, and our Sa- 
viour, be Glory,—Majesty,—Dominion—and Power, 
both now and for ever, Amen. 


227 


GENERAL INDEX 


Abingdon (England) Baptist church 
covenant, 159. 

Admission, forms of, 165, 204, 215, 216. 

Amsterdam Separatists employed the 
covenant idea, 59. 

Anabaptists and the church covenant 
idea, 13-25. 

Anabaptist use of the church cove- 
nant, 210. 

Anabaptist views in Scotland at an 
early period, 26, 27. 

Arber, Prof. Edward, concerning the 
churehes at Gainsborough and at 
Serooby, 51, 52; concerning John 
Smyth and John Robinson, 52. 


Baillie, Robert, concerning the cove- 
nant idea, 110. 

Baptist church, Providence, R. I., or- 
ganized without a covenant, 95. 

Baptist church, the first Particular or 
Calvinistic, organized in England in 
1633, 84. 

Baptist church, the first (General) or- 
ganized in England, 78. 

Baptist churches, earliest in New Eng- 
land, 94, 95. 

Baptist churches in New England in 
the seventeenth century, 189; in 
1832, 195. 

Baptist churches (General) in Eng- 
land in seventeenth century, man- 
ner of organization, 149, 150. 

Baptist churches, early rise of in Eng- 
land, from Congregational churches, 

150) 151. 

Baptists (Particular) in England prob- 

- ably used the church covenant more 
than the General Baptists, 156. 

Baptist views concerning the church 
covenant in England until 1700, 113- 
120. 

Barrowe and Greenwood’s effort to se- 
cure a Congregational polity be- 


tween Brownism and Presbyterian- 
ism, 58, 59. 

Bassingtown (England) Independent 
church covenant (about 1655), 137, 
138. 

Bath (England) Baptist church, 164. 

Beccles (England) Independent 
church covenant (1652), 135. 

Berwick, North (Maine), covenant of 
Baptist church, 194, 195. 

Bicknell, Hon. Thomas W., 174. 

Boston, covenant of the Dudley Street 
Baptist Church, 205, 206. 

Boston, covenant of First Baptist 
Church, 177-179. 

Bourton on the Water (England) Bap- 
tist church covenant, 161-163. 

Bowdoinham Association (Maine) 
publishes a covenant in 1795, 195, 
196; in 1817, 199, 200. 

Bredwell, Stephen, antagonizes Robert 
Browne’s church covenant idea, 62- 
64. 

Brewster, William, concerning the 
church covenant, 61. 

Broadmead Baptist church covenant, 
(1640), Bristol (England), 151, (1645) 
152, 153. 

Browne, Robert: his views concern- 
ing the church covenant, 34-42; 
whence he derived his views, 43, 44; 
his covenant idea generally accept- 
ed in the earliest English Independ- 
ent churches, 58-61; use of the cov- 
evant by Robert Browne’s church 
in Norwich, 210, 211. 


Chelsea (Mass.) Congregational 
church covenant, 208, 204. 

Christian, Rev. Dr. J. T., 150. 

Chureh covenant idea in the New 
Testament, Introduction, ix. 

Chureh covenant idea in the early 
Christian church, Introduction, ix, 


228 


Cotton, Rey. John, 98, 123. 
Covenant: use of the term in the Old 


church (1744), 145, 146 ; of the South- 


Testament, Introduction, ix; idea 
of, in the Reformation period among 
the Anabaptists, 13, 14; among the 
Scotch reformers, 26-33 ; as set forth 
by Robert Browne in England, 34- 
44 ; as first used by Brownists, 45-48; 
used in Francis Johnson’s church, 
48-51; used by Gainsborough-Seroo- 
by-Leyden-Plymouth church, 51-57; 
idea of, in early Independent 
churches, 58-61; criticism of idea 
of, among early English Inde- 
pendents, 62-65; idea of, in early 
English Baptist churches, 66-78; of 
Henry Jacob’s Independent church, 
London (1616), 79; renewed (1630), 
80; of Hugh Peter’s Rotterdam 
church (1633), 80-82; modified by 
Hugh Peter, 83, 84; idea of, in 
America, 85-95 ; of the Salem church 
(Mass.), 87-89; renewed at Salem, 
89-91; at Charlestown, Boston 
(Mass.), 91, 92; at Watertown 
(Mass.), 92, 93; used in organizing 
towns in Massachusetts and New 
Haven colonies, 93, 94; not used in 
organizing First Baptist Church in 
Providence, R. I., 95; idea of, dis- 
cussed by American and English 
Puritans, 96-112; idea of, among 
English Baptists until 1700, 113-121; 
influence of theidea of, from Ameri- 
can on English Congregational 
churches, 122, 123; use of, in Eng- 
lish Baptist churches after 1640, 124, 
125; use of, among English Congre- 
gationalists after 1640, 126-128; of 
the Yarmouth (England) church 
(1643), 128, 129; of the Norwich 
church (1644), 129-131; of the Ed- 
monsbury church (1646), 131, 132, 
(1648), 133; of the Woodbridge 
church (1651), 138, 184; of the Cock- 
ermouth church (1651), 134, 135; of 
the Beccles church (1652), 135; of 
the Wattisfield church (1654), 436, 
137; of the Bassingtown church 
(1655), 137, 188; of the Rowell church 
(1656), 188, 189 ; of the Keysoe church 
(1657), 139; alater, 140; of the North- 
ampton church (1695), 141; (1697), 
141, 142; of the Guestwick church 
(1695), 142-144; of the Milburn Port 


wold church (1748), 146, 147; of the 
Mattishall church (1772), 147, 148; 
among early English Baptists after 
1640, 149, 150 ; of the Broadmead Bap- 
tist church, Bristol (1640), 151, 152; 
(1645), 152, 158; of the chureh in 
Hexham (1652), 158, 154; of the 
Longworth church (1656), 154; of 
the church at Hitchin (about 1660), 
155; renewed (1681), 155; of the 
church in Kettering, 155, 156; of the 
Horsley-down church, 156-158; of 
the church at Abingdon, 159; of the 
church at Great Gransden, 159, 160; 
of the church at Bourton on the 
Water (1719-1720), 161-168; of the 
church in Bath, 164; of the Particu- 
lar church at Hail Weston, 164-166; 
half-way idea of, 167-172; of Baptist 
church in Swansea (Mass.), 173-176 ; 
of the First Baptist Church in Bos- 
ton, 177-179; of the Mayflower Con- 
gregational Church, Plymouth, 180, 
181; of the Baptist church in Kit- 
tery (Maine), 181, 182; of the Con- 
gregational church in Woburn 
(Mass.), 182, 183; of the Congrega- 
tional church in Plymouth (Mass.), 
184-186 ; of Congregational churches 
in Cotton Mather’s time, 186-189; of 
the First Baptist Church in Newport, 
R. I., 190-192; of the Baptist church 
in Sutton (Mass.), 192, 193; of the 
Baptist church in North Berwick 
(Me.), 194, 195; in Bowdoinham 
Association (Me.) minutes (1795), 
195, 196; of the Congregational 
church in Woburn (Mass.), 1756, 197, 
198; in Bowdoinham Association 
(Me.) minutes (1817), 199, 200; the 
New Hampshire, of 1832, 201, 202; of 
the First Congregational Church, 
Chelsea (Mass.), 208, 204; of the 
Dudley Street Baptist Church, Bos- 
ton (Mass.), 205, 206; of the First 
Baptist Church in Philadelphia, 206, 
207; of the Free Street Baptist 
Church, Portland (Me.), 207, 208; 
manner of using the church, 210- 
220; of Baptist church at Hammer- 
smith, England, 221-224; of the 
church at Bishop’s Stortford, Eng- 
land, 224-26. 


Crowle Records, 55, 46, 


229 


Danforth, Rev. Samuel, gives account 
of use of half-way covenants, 218. 
Dexter, H. M., D. D., 35, 48, 51, 55, 56, 

57, 59, 60, 79, 88, 170, 218. 
Drury, Rev. L., 174. 


Edmonsbury church covenant (1646), 
131, 182, (1648), 133. 

Edwards, Jonathan, opposed half-way 
covenants after 1749, 170. 


Farringdon (England) Baptist church 
covenant, 159. 

Featley, Dr. Daniel, concerning use 
of covenant in English Baptist 
churches in 1651, 124. 

Ford, Stephen, gives a statement as to 
the way churches should use the 
covenant, 217. 

Forms of admission, 165, 204, 215, 216. 

Free Street Baptist church covenant, 
Portland, Maine, 207, 208. 


Gainsborough-Scrooby-L ey den-Ply - 
mouth covenant, 51-57. 

Gould, Principal George P.: concern- 
ing use of covenant in Congrega- 
tional churches in England, 148; 
cited 166. 

Great Gransden (England) Baptist 
church covenant, 159. 

Guestwick (England) Independent 
church: concerning, 136, 137; cov- 
enant of 1695, 142-144. 


Hail Weston (England) Particular 
Baptist Church, 164, 165. 

Half-way covenants, 167-172; how 
used, 218. 

Hammersmith (England) Baptist 
church covenant, 221-224. 

Harmer, Rev. Thomas, concerning 
early English Congregational 
churches and their use of the cove- 
nant, 126-128. 

Hartford (Conn.) First Church’s half- 
way covenant, 172. 

Helwys and Murton’s church in Lon- 
don the first General or Arminian 

- Baptist church organized in Eng- 
land, 65, 78. 

Helwys, Thomas, emphasized baptism 
and not the covenant ideain church 
organization, 72-75, 77, 78. 

Hexham (England) Baptist church 
covenant, 153, ¥ 


Hitchin (England) Baptist church 
covenant, 155. 

Hofmann, Melchior, and the church 
covenant idea, 19-22. 

Hooker, Thomas, concerning the 
church covenant, 105, 106. 

Hubmeier, Dr. Balthasar, 17. 

Hutchinson, Edward, has no use for a 
church covenant, 118. 


Jacob, Henry, defines a Christian 
church, 60, 61; organizes Independ- 
ent church in London in 1616, 79, 85; 
how his church was formed in 1616, 
Ziee 

Jessey records cited, 84. 

Johnson, Francis, employs a church 
covenant in his church, 48-51; his 
covenant ‘‘underwritten,’’ 56. 


Keach, Benjamin, his views concern- 
ing a church covenant, 120, 121. 

Kettering (England) Baptist church 
covenant, 155, 156. 

Keysoe (England), Independent 
church: covenant of (1657), 139; 
later covenant of, 140. 

Kiffin manuscript cited, 85. 

Kiffin, William, concerning the church 
covenant, 119, 120. 

King, Rey. Dr. Henry M., Introduc- 
tion, x. 

Kittery (Maine), Baptist church coy- 
enant, 181, 182. 

Knollys, Hanserd, concerning the 
church covenant, 113-115. 


Lechford, Thomas, concerning use of 
the church covenant among early 
New England colonists, 111, 112. 

Leominster (England), church coy- 
enant, 154. 

Lewis, Rey. John, cOncerning use ot 
the covenant in English Baptist 
churches as late as 1660, 124, 125. 

Longworth (England), Baptist church 
covenant, 154, 


Mather, Cotton: concerning church 
covenants of his time, 186-189; con- 
cerning origin of the Gainsborough ° 
church (1602), 54. 

Mather, Richard, 10]. 

Mattishall (England) covenant, 147, 
148. 

Mayflower Church, 54. 


me 


230 


Mayflower church covenant of 1676, 
87; renewed, 179-181; how it was 
first used, 212. 

Mayflower covenant, 86. 

Milburn Port (England) covenant, 145, 
146. 

Murton, John, emphasized baptism 
and not the covenant idea in church 
organization, 74-78. 

Myles, Rev. John, at Swansea, Mass., 
173-176. 


New Hampshire covenant of 1832, 201, 
202. 

Newman, Prof. A. H., 1, 25. 

Newport, R. I., covenant of First Bap- 
tist Church, 190-192. 

Northampton (England) Congrega- 
tional church covenant, 141, 142. 

Norwich (England) Independent 
church covenant (1644) discussed, 
129-131; renewal of, 216, 217. 


Peter, Hugh, offers covenant to Eng- 
lish congregation at Rotterdam 
(1633), 80-82; covenant of modified, 
83, 84; renewed Salem ( Mass.) cove- 
nant of, 89-91 ; influences others, 140. 

Philadelphia, covenant of First Bap- 
tist Church, 206, 207. 

Plympton (Mass.) Congregational 
church covenant, 184-186. 

Presbyterianism in England not af- 
fected by discussion concerning the 
use of the covenant, 122. 


Racoyian catechism, 24. 

Rathband, William, gives an early 
definition of the church covenant, 
18be 

Renewal of church covenant, 216. 

Robinson, John ; views of coneerning 
a church, 60; his views concerning 
the church covenant, 61; gives an 
account of the organization of 
Smyth’s Baptist church, 70; con- 
cerning views of John Murton, 77; 
manner in which church of, .was 
formed, 211, 212. 


~ Rowell (English) Independent church 


covenant, 138, 189. 

Russell, Rev. John, his account in his 
‘‘Brief Narrative’’ of the organiza- 
tion of the First Baptist Church in 
Boston, 179. 


Salem (Mass.): church covenant adopt- 
ed, 87-89; renewed, 89-91; First 
Church, half-way covenant of, 171. 

Sattler, Michael, and the covenant 
idea, 15. 

Scotch covenants written or printed, 
210. ; 

Scotch reformers and the church cove- 
nant, 26-33. 

Seven Articles, 15-17. 

Smyth, John: spoken of, 52, 64, 65; de- 
velopment of his views, 67, 68; makes 
more of baptism than of the cove- 
nant idea, 69, 70-72. 

Southwold (England) church cove- 
nant, 146, 147, ; 

Spilsbury, John, as to Baptist views 
concerning church covenants, 115- 
118. 

Sutton (Mass.) Baptist church coyve- 
nant, 192, 193. 

Swansea (Mass.) Baptist church and 
covenant, 173-176. 


Taylor, Adam, concerning manner of 
organizing General Baptist churches 
in the seventeenth century, 149, 150. 

Tiverton (England) Baptist church, 
78. 

Towns organized by covenant in Mas- 
sachusetts and New Haven colonies, 
98, 94. 

Trumbull, Rev. Dr. H. Clay, Introduc- 
tion, ix. 


Vedder, Prof. H. C., 18. 


Walker, Prof. Williston, 34, 65, 82, 88, 
91, 109, 128, 167, 170, 171, 172. 

Waterlanders may have used a church 
covenant, 72. 

Watertown covenant, 92, 93. 

Wattisfield (England) covenant, 136, 
137% 

White, Rey. John, 87. 

Winslow, Edward, 55, 88. 

Woburn (Mass.) Congregational 
church covenant, 1642, 182, 183 ; 1756, 
197, 198. 

Wood, President N. E., 177, 179, 182. 


’ Woodbridge (England) Independent 


church covenant (1651), 188, 134. 


Yarmouth (England) Independent 
church covenant, 128, 129, 


NUON se a ae 
Pe cn rg 8 ae 


5 
t 
. 
* 
é 3 
' 
. 
, 
& bs 
+ 
‘ 
ee 
Nw 
wi - 
Fy . 
‘ 
\ ’ fF 
r 
3 
Ey 
vt vx 
ib 


ani 


ae > * hae - 
= 
, 


es 
ae é. { 
bos 
a * 
ir 2% | i nr por 


es “ ad ¥ 
ee eee ee 4 
‘ ie . | ale as hi 
Pea ie Sie neh 51a 


vo] a - ye iitiy 4 -? Saar E 
A es ma?r ys “ty we F : . es 


pai 


Ie, 06 


4 


4 i 
PaO ey, 

eae 

Sa TS 


ae 


oh ea 


Mr | i) ae 
7 wit es 
LO ss Se 
ey " rs 5 
, alee ; 
4 } Ss anes 
eee Ra to 
z v2 a3 3 
‘ ri he 
g ba p 
a 
ou oh 
A oom ‘ 
Ais 
a 
‘ay. ; 
¥ 
a 
‘ 
j 
' 
» Wy. 
en 
J ‘ae an 
pus F % 
“eu f 
a 
r i i 
a aoe an 
; y 1 > ; 
7 Tes parca Hi 
nh Wee Py i 
. ee s + Pe ie i ve) / aa ¥ 7 , q 
Jel Mh i 5 , es 4 R TP? b \ 
PAR ny i‘, "4 OL 
* * y 4 i 3 
Jed ¥ | 
; {es oe | : a 
Ei lie be « 
i an ek 


a Eee. 
Hey, =~ 
rut ie ty \ 


— 


nary-Speer Library 


1 1012 010 


iin 
| ae 


37 95 


| 
GAYLORD 
' | PRINTED INUSA 


ahi 


; ‘ 
» 4 
ond oy 
=A iy « ee 7 
ie ee BA ote 
vie 
' ps 4 ul 


af, ’ « i LRN ’ 
‘5 Patt Pa e has nee aa ’ ; 


le : "4 
ha bs Aik Rit a i Peat i Fs ' a | 


i Aj . a ‘ im Wei 
' ; rd J : d ’ * 
" ae ae a at g » i" ry 
if) iy hi Ua | ; f 
i ei ari oe) a1 
) if ‘+ oe A LA r sal ve 1 ’ Ps ant 
or ‘oy Ad! ee} ft) hl »’ ‘3 
vile. j > Pe, | i t as ‘ae 
{ | me : +. ¥j he A 0 4 or . ‘ 
/ ‘ or s ne ¥ 
sit aby t | ’ \¢ a , 
4} : ie Pen: hy ni : : iar ae 
Mega 4) hae We ee tan 
od eT pa ry jay? ty Ke yt : s “ rh ‘ 
‘7 ’ oe i i 's pe f is ate) ee 
are eR Sig “ Ag + hy j “ane ’ ‘ ee 
W fi ‘| wit at , 4 a! a ae i® (es iy ii? ‘Ws ? 
et eee ey! stn BS An AZ De ws 


is \ (Mie Pas Vi, H is oe ts bh Wu Veh ty 
hwy Pare e. Cet Hs “A: bf . 
| A i; "a, Va Bt apt J : 

Vaeal ft v4 ae LMT ham a 
af. 4 ? lng ue ix 


ae ape 
a ar oa” H yO 
ie 1 

eM E LAsee 


ieee se era 8 
cat aera ee 
Peers 


Sear 


plan See ime 


Finesse et 


ees: as ij 
EES 


i 


